FSD2385 Inhabitants' Welfare Survey: East Helsinki 2001
Aineisto on käytettävissä (C) vain tutkimukseen ja ylempiin opinnäytteisiin (esim. väitöstutkimukseen, pro graduun ja ylemmän AMK-tutkinnon opinnäytetyöhön). Aineistoa ei saa käyttää opetukseen, opiskeluun (esim. harjoitustöihin) tai alempiin opinnäytteisiin.
Aineistoon liittyvät tiedostot
- Aineistoon ei liity muita kuvailevia tiedostoja
- Eronen, Anne (Finnish Federation for Social Welfare and Health (STKL))
- Luomala, Juha (Finnish Federation for Social Welfare and Health (STKL))
communication networks, health services, living conditions, neighbourhoods, participation, private voluntary organizations, public services, quality of life, regional development, social networks, social services, social support, social welfare
The survey conducted by the Finnish Federation for Social Welfare and Health aimed at studying social welfare and opinions on welfare services in East Helsinki. The survey was conducted in co-operation with the Heikki Waris Institute and divided into six parts. The first part charted the respondents' housing and satisfaction with their residential area. The second part probed their life situation and assistance and support received from various bodies. The third part investigated opinions on services, and the fourth theme was related to possibilities of influencing and participating. The following topic covered the use of information networks, and finally there were questions on the respondents' financial circumstances.
In relation to housing, the respondents were queried their type of accommodation and how long they had lived in their current residential area. They were also asked in which area their family usually does various activities (e.g. shopping, library visits) and what they thought about their residential area from children's point of view. Plans to move were charted, as well as reasons for them.
In terms of the respondents' life situation, they were asked to assess various things in their lives, such as their family relationships and residential area both now and over the next 5 years. The respondents also rated the importance of various persons/bodies (family, relatives, friends, neighbours, voluntary organisations, municipal or government officials, parishes, private service providers, etc.) in providing financial, spiritual and emotional support, or providing help with domestic responsibilities or with child/elderly care.
Satisfaction with a number of social, health and employment services, as well as the services provided by KELA (Social Insurance Institution of Finland) and Employment and Economic Development Office were charted. Views on the adequacy of information exchange and counselling offered by each service provider were charted. The respondents' use of private health and social services (e.g. pharmacies, private medical services, home and child care services, services for substance misusers) were also studied.
In view of participation, the respondents were asked to assess the importance of various things related to leisure time (e.g. pets, theatres). Influencing was charted by asking the respondents how often they had used various styles of influencing, whether they were members in any voluntary organisations (NGOs) or associations, and if yes, what kind of roles they had in them. The reasons for being involved in the activities of an organisation or association were also canvassed.
Further questions charted the use of information networks. The respondents were asked whether their family had a computer or Internet connection, how much experience the adults in the family had on computers, and which online services they had used or would like to use. In addition, they were asked whether they would like to receive help in using the Internet.
The respondents' financial situation was examined by asking their and their spouse's (if applicable) employment status and disposable income during the past year. They were also asked to assess the adequacy of their family's income in view of purchasing various things.
Background variables included the respondent's gender, categorised age, education, household composition, household size, mother tongue, and district of residence.
Aineiston kuvailu on lisensoitu Creative Commons Nimeä 4.0 Kansainvälinen -lisenssin mukaisesti.