YOUNG HUNGARIANS

RESEARCH REPORT

Edited by Béla Bauer, Bence Ságvári, Andrea Szabó

ISBN 963 -8677 -45 -7

9 799638 677456

youth2004 res rep.qxd

2005. 09. 14.

1:55

Page 2

The original Hungarian version of the report was written by Béla Bauer Kálmán Gábor Ferenc Gazsó László Laki Miklós Péter Máder Szilárd Molnár Zsuzsanna Molnár Ádám Nagy István Nemeskéri Péter Pillók Gergely Rosta Andrea Szabó Tímea Tibori

Editor of the English version Bence Ságvári The report was translated by Dániel Nagy English collaborator Etienne Lainé

The publication of this report was sponsored by the Ministry of Youth, Social and Family Affairs and Equal Opportunities

Publisher: Director of Mobilitas Office of Youth Research

© Béla Bauer, Kálmán Gábor, Ferenc Gazsó, László Laki, Miklós Péter Máder, Szilárd Molnár, Zsuzsanna Molnár, Ádám Nagy, István Nemeskéri, Péter Pillók, Gergely Rosta, Andrea Szabó, Tímea Tibori © Béla Bauer, Bence Ságvári, Andrea Szabó editors, 2005 © Mobilitás Office of Youth Research, 2005

ISBN 963 8677 45 7

youth2004 res rep.qxd

2005. 09. 14.

1:55

Page 5

5

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Demography and family relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Family status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Childbearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
‘Expansion of education’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Educational inequalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Economic activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Entering work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Material, financial, income and housing situation . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Family situation, self-dependents and dependents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Income relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Housing situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Information society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Use and access to computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Internet access and use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Lifestyle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Smoking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Alcohol consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Experimenting with drugs and drug abuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Cultural consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Reading habits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Scenes of ‘cultural consumption’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Spending free time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

youth2004 res rep.qxd

2005. 09. 14.

1:55

Page 6

6

Youth2004 Research report

Values and social perspectives of young people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Life principles, importance of values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Public opinion on the transition and the future of Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Political activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Problems facing today’s youth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Index of figures and tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

and having children are closely correlated. leisure activities and cultural consumption of young people. Young people – irrespective of their qualifications – usually get married after entering work and have their first child in the following two years. Similar tendencies can be described in the case of young people doing the kind of intellectual work that does not require a degree. Already by 2000 more than two fifths of our sample entered the labor . Up until 1993-1995. has lengthened. 09. 1:55 Page 7 INTRODUCTION Hungarian society has been undergoing the lengthy process of transition for (already) one and a half decades. Data from the eighties and even from the early nineties reveal that in the case of skilled workers. as a period in one’s life. young people spend more and more time in education. career. becoming self-sustaining and acceding to financial opportunities have changed. leaving school. Paying special attention to societal change and the opinion structures of youth.youth2004 res rep. Ifjúság2004 is the second social scientific and sociological study to attempt a description of the generational changes that resulted from the social and economic transformations of a changing regime. as well as in the case of workers who partake in routine white collar activities (especially those with secondary school degrees). and another third at the age of 19 or later. and acquiring comparable longitudinal data. For example. one third of young people holding vocational certificates enter the labor market at the age of 18. the study seeks to record how these changes have impacted on the lifestyles. 14. However. Since the transition began.qxd 2005. Furthermore. beginning work. starting a family. Recent sociological research on youth indicates that ‘youth’ itself. was to record the extent and ways in which social factors effecting education. One of the aims of reproducing the 2000 youth study. entering the world of work usually coincided with obtaining one’s secondary school degree. the snapshot we hereby provide attempts to offer insight into the processes of the past 15 years and in particular into the changes which occurred over the last four years. employment. The effects of the transition have had an undeniable impact on public opinion in ways which come to shape Hungary’s budding civil society and political democracy.

only the father’s secondary education qualifications may be regarded as a caesura for the time being. Within this age group’s life strategies we can observe new dynamics of dependency and independency in relation to the parental home. Nonetheless. Ifjúság2000 called attention to the fact that even in 2000 the intention to have children was tied to marriage. The prolongation of youth as a stage of life is further indicated by the fact that while young people want children. 14. However. This traditional inclination remains essentially unchanged as the data indicates that young people tend to marry around the same time as they have their first child. it seems that from the point of view of pursuing higher education.3% of the whole population was unmarried. such as the single. Although it is undeniable that the period following the political transition assertively introduced cohabitation as the ‘new’ form of permanent relationship. Leaving the parental home mostly coincides with marriage or cohabitation with a partner.g. the prospect of pursuing higher education has appreciably improved in the past four years. This can partly be explained – along with the increased time spent in education – by a change in commitment to permanent relationships by men and women in the second half of their twenties. or later. Nevertheless. or even the ‘pre-single’ stage. The question can be raised whether postponing entry into the world of work bears relation to the integration of young individuals in society and their acceptance of traditions and norms. The prolongation of the youth stage promotes other roles. a study conducted in 2002 among freshman students of higher education indicates that this hope was unfounded. In the year 2000. sociological studies on youth cherished the hope that qualification levels would rise. in 2001 and 2002 the figures were 27. Though higher education holds certain opportunities for the children of parents with secondary or higher educational qualifications. this de- .qxd 2005. Similar tendencies can be observed in 2004.1% and 28% respectively. In the nineties.youth2004 res rep. in the last 10 years having one’s first child has been delayed by a couple of years. for children of fathers holding secondary educational qualifications. thereby maintaining the illusion that the gates of higher education would also open for those lower down the social ladder (e. While in 1990. for the better part of society education remains only a theoretical possibility of social advancement. The Ifjúság2004 data on young people between 15 and 29 shows that this trend is on the increase. The proportion of children of parents holding no more than secondary school degrees significantly increased both among university and college students. and is no longer simply correlated with finishing one’s studies or entering work. Consequently. This results from the fact that the time spent living with one’s parents overlaps with becoming independent. 20. children of rural families with low educational attainments). the unequivocal beneficiaries of the expansion of higher education seemed to be young people belonging to the most educated familial and social environments. 1:55 Page 8 8 Youth2004 Research report market for the first time at the age of 20. 09.

The few leisure activities young people report doing out of impulse rather than conscious thought reflect actions and decisions which. may provide sufficient fundamental information to make it possible to a have systematic and extensive youth research program in Hungary. the desire for ambitious social activity has almost disappeared from the cultural activities of young people. Furthermore. . The fact that material principles are coming to play a less and less significant role in young people’s value systems may be explained by the country’s economic improvement and a further increase in social stability. Social and Family Affairs and Equal Opportunities. for the most part. the likelihood of young people from disadvantageous familial and social environments to enter further education seems to have. it appears that differences in social background have an incommensurable impact on educational opportunity and result in perpetuating inequality. children of fathers having vocational high school or elementary school qualifications). In other words. for the better part of the year 2004 we conducted the so-called Ifjúság2004 study. Compared to previous years. At present. while (more) transcendent ideas or values (creativity. we have neither any pretensions pertaining to a profound interpretation of the existing data. world of beauty) have come to play an increasingly central role in the life of young people. respect of traditions. involve only the individual him/herself. 09. we observed that the number. In parallel. What is more. if anything. prosperity. We hope that the Ifjúság2004 study. which follows from the Ifjúság2000 study. This report’s purpose is to provide a basic insight into the most important preliminary results of the research. values regarding one’s individual life. It is our opinion that the above-mentioned facts are sufficient to justify conducting a study whose focus would be to survey the changes and processes which are affecting the youth’s situation.youth2004 res rep. values relating to a sense of security (peaceful world.qxd 2005. notions of self-realization. Therefore. nor will we seek to explore and explain any of the correlations which may emerge. 14. social order) have fallen behind on the ranking of values. and values which directly impact on everyday actions appear to have taken the front stage of young people’s value systems. the demand for companionship and communal spirit rarely appears. 1:55 Page 9 Introduction 9 velopment seems to have had no beneficial effect for those two groups of young people belonging to familial and social environments having even lower qualifications (that is. would surely disappoint the expectations of recent studies in cultural sociology. and by the Prime Minister’s Office. In fact. The research program was financed by the Ministry of Youth. of cultural activities which young people participate in. as well as the kind. decreased. Subsequently.

1:55 Page 10 DEMOGRAPHY AND FAMILY RELATIONS FAMILY STATUS The Ifjúság2000 study reiterated some of what may already have been evident for demographers and sociologists: one of the feature characteristics of today’s youth is the lengthening of time spent in education and postponed entry into the world of work. Figure 1: Distribution of young people by marital status (in percentages) . In 2004. marriages are less common. we observe that this trend has strengthened. 14. Compared to the data of the Ifjúság2000 study. nearly seven tenths of the 15-29 age group remain unmarried. this impacts on youth by delaying the forming of permanent partnerships and the founding of a family. However.youth2004 res rep. which involve fewer restrictions while supposedly retaining equal emotional intensity.qxd 2005.e. 09. 17% live in common-law marriages. have become more frequent. and 14 % are married. In turn. the cohabitation of a couple even when it does not constitute a legal marriage). Four years later. while common-law marriages (i. the composition of those living in permanent partnerships changed significantly: the proportion of married young people decreased by 5%. Also. its 2004 counterpart revealed no significant changes relating to the proportion of unmarried young men and women.

discrepancies between the marital status of men and women are consistent with the previous study. Respectively. and 61% of women are unmarried. 51% of men between 25 and 29 were unmarried. as our subjects get older. one fifth and one sixth are married under common-law.youth2004 res rep. Four years ago. while there are 7% less marriages amongst men. Rather. 09. Compared to 2000. As expected. there appears to be a change in the form of permanent relationships of those living together outside contractual obligations. Figure 2: Distribution of men’s marital status by age category (in percentages) In the case of the oldest segment of men. differences between these two types of permanent partnerships are not as substantial: 11 and 12% live in marriages or cohabitations respectively. Within the youngest (15-19) age category studied we found but rare examples of permanent partnerships. Nearly 16% of the 20-24 age group married under common-law follow this legally more lax relationship by a formal marriage. 35% of them were married. and 11% of them lived in common-law marriages.qxd 2005. 17% of women are married under common-law. Naturally. this does not result in a lack of permanent partnerships. Today. 14. In the latter category. the change is even more evident. the increase is of 7%. changes occur: 9% of 20 to 24 year olds. there is a 9% decrease in the proportion of married women even in the . and 22% of them are formally married. 76% of men. we noticed significant changes with regards to the data of the Ifjúság2000 study. In the case of men. 1:55 Page 11 Demography and family relations 11 in parallel with an increase of 7% of those married under common-law. Even though the proportion of marriages has undoubtedly diminished. while as far as young people between 25 and 29 are concerned every third common-law marriage results in marriage. and 36% of those between 25-29 are married. As far as women are concerned.

In parallel. and an increase of 12% in the case of common-law marriages. Reasons for this decrease derive from the fact that. and 11% are raised by single parents. and over three fourths plan to have children.youth2004 res rep. To conclude. 1:55 Page 12 12 Youth2004 Research report Figure 3: Distribution of women’s marital status according to age category (in percentages) 20-24 age group. Around 18% of respondents in the 15-29 age group decisively declare having no intention to have a/another child. Though we observed a low number of children in the study. four years ago every fourth women between 15 and 29 (55%) was married as opposed to the present figure of 43%. one quarter are brought up by parents married under common-law. and less than a fifth of parents with two children claim to want another. Compared to the average. fewer decide to have one or two children. more than half plan on having another child. Among young parents. 4% intend to decide according to circumstances. The change in the marital status of women between 20 and 29 can be regarded as dramatic. thereby indicating a 3% decrease in comparison to 2000. Two thirds of children are raised by married parents. changes in lifestyle and the prolongation of education as a phase of life mainly affects women aged between 25 and 29. CHILDBEARING One fifth of the sample’s subjects already have children. the proportion of unmarried women increased from 27% to 35%. Indeed. the proportion of those intending to have children depending on circumstances is higher in . 09. these numbers could easily rise were the young people in our sample to decide they wanted children. 14.qxd 2005. though the proportion of young people having three or more children remains essentially unchanged.

09. The low level of intent to childbearing is further illustrated by some of the results in the chapter on the values of youth.youth2004 res rep. A total of 9% of those without children intend never to have any. However. As far as young people with no more than a primary education and those with vocational certificates are concerned. 82% of young people with secondary school degrees.) . seven tenths of skilled workers. 1:55 Page 13 Demography and family relations 13 Figure 4: How many children do you have? In 2000 and in 2004 (in percentages) both groups. they are also the group with the lowest number of children. the intent to have children is lower since they are the group with the highest proportion of young parents amongst them (17% of young people with no more than a primary education.qxd 2005. and 37% of skilled workers already have children. and slightly more than three-quarters of those with no more than primary educational qualifications would like to have children. young people with a university degree comprise the highest proportion (around 90%) of those wanting children. In line with the data presented so far. 14.

and the remainder undergo further vocational training in a variety of professions in high . a town. Young people partake in growing numbers and higher proportions in education. In the past four years. In 2000 34%. the 15-29 age group’s participation in education increased by approximately 6%. a significant development is that of the ‘expansion of education’: schooling begins earlier and proceeds further in life.qxd 2005. In the midst of altered demographic conditions. According to the results of this survey. a city…). as well as according to social status. the proportion of those in education has not increased in recent years. 14. However. whether one lives in a village. above all. among secondary school students. opportunities to secondary education vary substantially according to settlement type (i. Table 1: Participation in education in 2000 and in 2004 respectively by age groups (in percentages) In the youngest age category. Of this group.youth2004 res rep. 09.e. In this respect. but in which secondary school to pursue one’s studies. data also indicates an undisputable and robust increase in participation in higher education. 7% attends technical training subsequently to vocational secondary schooling. This impulse is clearly illustrated by the fact that between 2000 and 2004. 75% study in higher education. 1:55 Page 14 EDUCATION ‘EXPANSION OF EDUCATION’ With regards to young people aged between 15 and 29. Data indicates that the increase in secondary education has already come to a halt. and in 2004 40% of the whole population was pursuing some kind of educational program. we notice that in recent years this expansion has. the problem facing a young person leaving elementary school is no longer that of a choice between continuing studies and staying at home. affected the 25-29 age group. the proportion of 20-24 year olds attending classes has increased by 14%.

As far as the oldest age group of the sample (25-29 year olds) is concerned. this can help us understand why more and more young people combine work alongside their studies. Although the proportion of students continuing their studies in secondary schools has slightly decreased. This is an especially significant change.qxd 2005. On the other hand. university or college curricula are lengthier. combining work and studies seems to have become the configuration characterizing this age group. there are no significant changes in the proportions of students. Table 2: Distribution of students in education by type of school in 2000. Further. it seems that the long-expected decrease in the proportion of students undertaking apprenticeship training has come to a halt. More precisely. As far as university education is concerned. On the basis of the Ifjúság2004 study. 14. the proportion of those partaking in education has grown from 4% to 12% in the last four years. the increase in percentage is too low to indicate a change of trend. we determined . it can be explained by the fact that entry into higher education occurs later in life. this configuration is also becoming widespread amongst the 20-24 age group. we drew a more accurate and differentiated picture of the social makeup of secondary and higher education on the basis of a large scale sample drawn both in 2000 and 2004. yet. In turn. and characterizes 10% of students in higher education. EDUCATIONAL INEQUALITIES As opposed to earlier studies. Two thirds of students combine learning with some kind of paid activity. On one hand. However. we may infer some conclusions pertaining to whether the structure of secondary and higher education has changed. 09. Data indicates that no significant change can be observed in the structure of secondary education. Indeed. vocationaltechnical education remains an attractive option.youth2004 res rep. 1:55 Page 15 Education 15 demand on the labor market. and in 2004 (in percentages) The table’s data indicates that the rise in participation in higher education has come about mainly through a significant increase in the number of students going to college. Due to an increase in demand for skilled labor.

especially in higher education. In this respect. this figure is only 19% for the group whose parents only hold elementary qualifications or less. Table 3: Participation in education of 15 to 29 year olds according to father’s educational level (in percentages) The data reflects an unchanged picture. 1:55 Page 16 16 Youth2004 Research report the proportions of various socio-cultural groups in secondary education.youth2004 res rep. Only 3% of the children of parents with elementary qualifications partake in higher education. it is unequivocal that educational discrepancies resulting from disparities in social background are especially high. the past four years have not brought about any changes. Invariably.qxd 2005. Disadvantages stemming from social class are unequivocal in comparing apprenticeship training and vocational/technical schools with other schools. only apprenticeship training provides a viable opportunity for pursuing education. Table 4: Distribution of university and college students by the father’s qualifications in 2000 and 2004 (in percentages) In 2000. If we look through the distribution of university and college students in relation to their father’s qualifications. Based on the concordant results of the 2000 and 2004 studies’ sampling. 09. While seven tenths of young people belonging to the most educated familial and social environments take part in some kind of secondary or higher education. some transformations are noticeable. 14. and how the structural makeup they draw to see has changed within the context of a rapidly expanding higher education system. the unequivocal beneficiaries of the ‘expansion’ of higher education seemed to be young people belonging to the most educated familial and social . for the group whose parents hold low qualifications. and have not diminished in spite of the ‘expansion’ of the educational system. we might notice the following. However.

In the past four years. What is more. it seems that in relation to prospects of higher education. Therefore. educational inequalities resulting from differences in social backgrounds invariably impact on the youth’s opportunities to acquire knowledge. it is only the father’s secondary education qualifications that should be regarded as caesura.qxd 2005. 1:55 Page 17 Education 17 environments. 14. for young people from disadvantageous domestic and social environments. the prospects for further education seem even gloomier than before. . Concerning those two groups of youth belonging to familial and social environments with even lower qualifications (that is. Thus. the ‘expansion’ has had virtually no beneficial effect on their situation. The proportion of children with parents holding secondary school degrees significantly increased both among university and college students. prospects to pursue studies in higher education mostly improved for children of fathers holding secondary education degrees. children of fathers holding no more than vocational certificates or primary educational qualifications).youth2004 res rep. 09.

became unemployed).g. decided to further their studies) or were contrived to leave (e. 14. denoting a significant and tendency-like shift.g. 09. meaning that two thirds belong to the 25-29 age group. roughly two thirds (38%) of these occupations were manual jobs. nearly one third are between 20-24 years of age.qxd 2005. 1:55 Page 18 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ENTERING WORK Two-fifths (39%) of young people between 15 and 29 have been employed at some point during the course of their studies. By 2004 this number increased to 58%. and only 2% belong to the 15-19 group. In 2000. White Figure 5: Occupational structure of working young people between 15 and 29 (gender-specific distribution) .youth2004 res rep. but sooner or latter left their jobs (e. The “employed” are roughly distributed along the two older age categories. and a further 5% of them have combined studies and work. number of young people have already completed their studies to enter the labor market. Of course.

and this figure rises to nearly seven-tenths (68%) in villages. The occupational distribution shows similar differences along the lines of ‘settlement types’. industry or services. The types of occupations held by men and women differ significantly.qxd 2005. above all as “office” employees (26%). 09. The overwhelming majority – over two thirds – of men do manual work. and the majority of them work as skilled workers (27%). the proportion of young people performing white collar work is of 50%. Only one per cent of the youth works in the agricultural sector. Also. half of the women work in white collar jobs. the proportion of manual workers revolves around three fifths (63%). It is important to note that the proportion of female professionals (19%) highly surpasses that of male professionals (8%). there is a low percentage of women in manual jobs. A tenth of white collar workers are entrepreneurs working mainly in the fields of commerce. mostly as skilled workers (44%). Figure 6: Occupational distribution of working young people between 15 and 29 by ‘settlement’ type (in percentages) In the capital. there is a low proportion of semi-skilled (17%) and especially unskilled (5%) workers. In the country’s other towns. In contrast. indicating a low demand for this kind of work. 14. . whereas the rest of the country sees a higher proportion of manual workers (47%) rather than white collar employees (42%). The proportion of male employees doing white collar work is only around one quarter.youth2004 res rep. 1:55 Page 19 Economic activity 19 collar jobs occupy over a third of the occupational distribution. In contrast.

one third of those doing non-remunerated housework. we witness the predominance of higher education amongst today’s youth. Finally. 1:56 Page 20 20 Youth2004 Research report Contrasting with earlier decades. 09. or did not want to. Although there are higher education students who are affected by unemployment (5-10%). in percentages within a given group) . (Of course. remain in education. since there are near to no workers without elementary qualifications and the proportion of those holding only primary educational qualifications is but a tenth. Figure 7: Have you ever been unemployed? (by group. The overwhelming majority (28%) of those concerned has already been registered as unemployed. One third of respondents claimed having already been unemployed during their rather brief “working lives”.qxd 2005. if we account for college (11%) and university (4%) graduates. or and another minority (3%) claims having been both registered and unregistered as unemployed. 14. but displays the fact that those with low educational qualifications do not even enter the labor market.youth2004 res rep. this problem mainly impacts those who could not. the data does not reveal a significant improvement in qualifications. Accordingly. Further. the distribution of employees by educational qualifications provides us with an encouraging picture. and two fifths of those “on maternity leave” report having been unemployed.) UNEMPLOYMENT Unemployment remains one of the youth’s main problems. Among the employed. the incidence of those affected by unemployment is even higher: nearly fifty per cent reported having known such a state of affairs. vocational certificates do not predominate and are to be found in equal proportion to secondary school degrees (37%). a minority (3%) has not.

Taking into account the high proportion of young people affected by unemployment. significant differences can be found as far as occupational groupings are concerned: while around seventy per cent (69%) of unskilled and nearly sixty per cent (59%) of semi-skilled workers claimed having been unemployed. 14. or being incapable of re-entering the labor market once having left school. Three themes recur: fear of being unable to enter the world of work. “only” a rough forty per cent of office workers and professionals (44% and 37% respectively) made such claims.youth2004 res rep. 1:56 Page 21 Economic activity 21 In this respect. 30% of 15-29 year olds have known such a state of affairs twice or more.qxd 2005. The seriousness of this situation is further indicated by the fact that while for three tenths of our sample the length of unemployment did not exceed three months. the majority of young people suffer from extended periods of joblessness. . loosing one’s job. 09. and the widespread negative social experience it induces. Although a majority (69%) has been unemployed only once. it comes as no surprise that a significant part of the youth (42%) lives in dread of joblessness.

and partially from the pressure of being financially responsible for themselves and their families. SELF-DEPENDENTS AND DEPENDENTS 36% of young people between 15 and 29 are independent. Young people defined as independent.753 Forints. whether living alone.465 Forints in Northern Hungary. They form a category which is more or less financially responsible for their everyday life and that of their family’s.6 years of age) than the so-called dependents (who average at 20. 62% of the independent youth work (even while studying). we will use the equivalence method of calculation. 1:56 Page 22 MATERIAL. Households’ monthly net income per consumer unit averages at 63. this group contrasts with young people who live with their parents and have not started a family of their own. there is practically no difference between the households of dependent or independent youths. INCOME RELATIONS To calculate the per capita income of each household.119 Forints. whereas in villages the numbers drop to 53. or with a family of their own. are on average significantly older (they average at 25. . 09.005 Forints. FINANCIAL.youth2004 res rep. As far as income per capita is concerned. From the material point of view.6 years of age). In Budapest. We divided the income per consumer unit into five parts in order to approximately infer the income situation of young people’s households. live alone or with a family of their own. INCOME AND HOUSING SITUATION FAMILY SITUATION.qxd 2005. However. 14.594 Forints. and decreases to 51. the average income per consumer unit in a household housing a 15-29-year old is of 85. whereas this holds true of only 34% of those living with their parents. differences in households’ average income per consumer unit can be observed at the regional level: the average income per consumer unit in Central Hungary is 79. We find even larger differences if we compare households according to ‘settlement types’. Partially resulting from their age difference.

14. by region Figure 8: Average income of households per consumer unit by ‘settlement type’ (in HUF) .qxd 2005. 09.youth2004 res rep. income and housing situation 23 Table 5: Average income of households per consumer unit. financial. 1:56 Page 23 Material.

youth2004 res rep. For the better part of the year. 09. dormitory.qxd 2005. and the remaining 14% live in rented flats. one fifth of them live in their own flat/house or the flat/house of their life/matrimonial partner. 14. or at a friends’ place. Table 6: Where do you live most of the year? (in percentages) . 1:56 Page 24 24 Youth2004 Research report HOUSING SITUATION Two thirds of respondents live at their parents’ place.

youth2004 res rep. 1:56 Page 25 INFORMATION SOCIETY By the end of 2004. the proportion of Hungarian households owning personal computers has increased by only one percent (from 31% to 32%) between 2003 and 2004. the main focus pertained to patterns of internet usage and differences in the experiences of home internet use. young people socialized in a digital environment) has experienced a qualitative shift. During the Ifjúság2000 study. online banking) have expanded individuals’ digital resources. 14. An ambivalent process is being introduced in Hungary. Technological changes (e. emphasis was placed on surveying the habits of computer users.e. 09. According to World Internet Project’s (WIP) 2004 data. and the use of internet at home has increased by 2% (from 12% to 14%). we observed significant changes in some of our sample’s age groups. whereas in the Ifjúság2004 study. the results of the youth-specific Ifjúság2004 study reveal that 57% of households own a PC. while approximately 24% of these households are able to connect to the internet. the digital culture and literacy of “old” users (i. the use of broadband at home and in schools) and the growing utilization of internet services and applications (e. a newborn divide appeared in Hungarian society regarding the possession of modern information and communication technology (ICT). While there are no significant changes in the number of “new” internet and computers users (older generations seem unable to embark).g.qxd 2005. These appeared as outstanding even when compared to other EU countries. By contrast. . We would hereby like to call to attention to both specialists and decision-makers in considering the fact that Hungary’s “digital divide” is deepening rather than declining.g. While national data sources reveal that by 2004 the development of the information society has come to a halt in Hungary.

Particularly significant changes can be observed when comparing data with the Ifjúság2000 study which uncovered only 29% of households to be equipped with PCs. In four years time. We also observed a spectacular increase in young people’s use of PCs. the well-known “urban trickledown” is once more apparent: computer ownership in young people’s households varies from 71% for Budapest to 46% in villages. In 2000. this proportion drops to 49% in the case of older age groups. The lowest scores are once again characteristic of Northern Hungary (50%). Also.qxd 2005. and the North Great Plain (49%). 1:56 Page 26 26 Youth2004 Research report USE AND ACCESS TO COMPUTERS Today. computer ownership has almost doubled. . 09. there are notable discrepancies amongst age categories. 14. 46% of young people between 15 and 29 used a PC.youth2004 res rep. Access to PCs at home is far above average in Central-Hungary (66%) and in West Transdanubia (63%). more than half (57%) of young people’s households are equipped with personal computers. Figure 9: Possession of PCs in young people’s households in 2000 and 2004 (in percentages of respondents) Pertaining to households’ access to computers. while in 2004 the total number rose to 70%. Such regional variations are consistent with those reported in the 2000 study. The older groups’ households seem less likely to have a computer: while 67% of the 15-19 year olds’ households are equipped with personal computers.

we witness that 74% of young people living in Budapest use the Internet. which can be regarded as a strong increase. 77% of 15 to 19-year-olds use the internet. 09. the rate at which Budapest households’ are gaining internet access is three times superior to that of village households. The region of the North Great Plain. 38% of households in the region of Central Hungary. Proportionally.qxd 2005. and 25% of young people in the region of West Transdanubia have access to the Internet at home.youth2004 res rep. The proportion of households with internet access is 45% in the capital. has to be regarded as lagging behind. and the lowest in the northeast part of the country – in the regions of Northern Hungary (51%) and the North Great Plain (49%). 24% of households have Internet access. 14. compared to only 47% in villages. Examining ‘settlement types’. 1:56 Page 27 Information society 27 Figure 10: Do you use a PC? (in percentages of respondents. since only 9% of young people had internet at home in 2000. Only 45% of young people in the oldest age group use the internet at least once a month. as we approach the older age groups the proportion of users decreases. in 2000 and 2004) INTERNET ACCESS AND USE 59% of young people use the Internet at least once a month. however. and contrasts with a mere . where only 16% of households have internet access. The highest proportion of internet-users is to be found in Central Hungary (70%).

Schools. 27% of the youngest age group has Internet access at home.qxd 2005. . in contrast with 21% of the oldest age group. 14. in 2000 and 2004) 14% in villages. 1:56 Page 28 28 Youth2004 Research report Figure 11: Does your household have internet access? (in percentages of respondents. remain the primary location for internet browsing. The proportion of young internet users who use internet from schools or universities rests at 55%. 09.youth2004 res rep. We witnessed that in the case of the oldest age group. A third of the latter use these locations above any others. though their importance is in decline. the dominance of the workplace as a location for browsing has severely declined given the increase in internet use at home.

Data indicates that a person who does not smoke. Figure 12: Do you smoke? (in percentages) . 14. Around a third of the respondents have never smoked and 27% are currently non-smokers. no significant or fundamental change has taken place in the smoking habits of young people. More than half of the respondents tried out smoking at ages as young as between 14 and 16 years old. However. Consequently. or the first years of secondary school. the proportion of ‘active’ smokers is located around 37%. until he/she turns 20 is unlikely to become an ‘active’ smoker. The overwhelming majority of young smokers smoke every day. while 8% can be regarded as occasional smokers. the proportion of daily smokers has undoubtedly increased in parallel to the proportion of non-smokers decreasing. projected onto the whole of the 1529 age group. even if only to experiment. 12% of them smoke at least once a week. 1:56 Page 29 LIFESTYLE SMOKING Around four tenth of the studied age group’s entire population claims to smoke at least occasionally. Those who smoke regularly usually smoke 13-14 cigarettes a day.youth2004 res rep. 09. Compared to 2000. First smoking experiences habitually occur during the last years of primary.qxd 2005.

09. or only rarely. the data above indicates that Figure 13: How often have you drunk alcohol in the past year? (in percentages) . professionals can be regarded as primary consumers of alcohol. and six per cent of women drink alcohol on a weekly basis. Indeed. since 18% of them consume alcoholic beverages on a weekly basis. 1:56 Page 30 30 Youth2004 Research report Four years later – similarly to 2000 – the category of daily smokers is dominated by male respondents. By their own account. 14. According to their own accounts. nearly a quarter of men. Compared to the data compiled four years ago. ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION 59% of the 15-29 age group claims not having. and nearly two tenths of the Budapest youth drink alcohol on a weekly basis.qxd 2005. but more often than not several. More then a tenth of 15 to 29 year olds living in villages. times a week. the most endangered category of young people are those holding vocational certificates. 37% of 15-29 year old men smoke on a daily basis in contrast to slightly over a quarter of young women. 55% of men and more than two thirds of women do not smoke. Similarly to smoking. we can register a change of 2-3% in the number of smokers. the drinking habits of male and female respondents differ. we can make several important statements. The proportion of young women smoking daily has increased by 3%. In our opinion. drunk alcohol in the past year. Once again. and by 2% in the case of young men.youth2004 res rep. Similar contrasts to those above can be drawn concerning the characteristic differences of the youth living in villages or in the capital. Analyzing the demographic variables. As opposed to smoking. nearly a fifth of them drink alcohol at least. The negative long-term consequences of alcohol consumption primarily manifest themselves on weekly or daily drinkers.

the experimenting with and using of drugs is tied to higher social status.qxd 2005. Among young people who. as opposed to smoking and alcohol. This data seems to indicate that. the more likely it is that he/she has already tried some kind of drug. or simply uses. according to their own account. the proportion of those who tried drugs is of 11%. around one fifth of the 4000 young interviewees indicated having tried or used some kind of drug. the proportion of Budapest youth is higher than the national average. but in the quality of the consumed product. some kind of narcotic drug. AccordFigure 14: Have you ever tried drugs? (in percentages of people answering to the question) . have tried. 1:56 Page 31 31 the difference does not lie in the frequency of alcohol consumption. 14. Within this sample. or use drugs. Among those who had tried drugs. college and university students. The higher educational qualifications a respondent’s father has. This indicates that young women are “emancipated” as far as drug use is concerned. men again constitute a greater proportion. though we witnessed a proportional harmonization with women’s drug experiences.youth2004 res rep. EXPERIMENTING WITH DRUGS AND DRUG ABUSE Answering a written and confidential questionnaire. This constitutes a serious social problem given that 43% of respondents claimed having an acquaintance or friend who has tried. We recorded a superior average rate of experimentation and drug use among technical. while the proportion of users is of 12%. 09.

qxd 2005. or use. 1:56 Page 32 32 Youth2004 Research report ingly. 14. 09.youth2004 res rep. or uses. some kind of drug. Those who have tried. or use. drugs marijuana and prescription sleeping pills or tranquillizers are the most popular substances. Among those who have tried. the higher the respondent’s qualifications. drugs are commonly found within the 20-24 age group. The proportion of drug users decreases both under and above this dividing line. . the more likely it is that he/she has tried.

but rather focus on reading habits and cultural activities. Young people reading books de facto read three times as many books in 2000 as in 2004. READING HABITS In line with the Ifjúság2000 study. in 2000 and 2004 . 14. 1:56 Page 33 CULTURAL CONSUMPTION The Ifjúság2004 study.youth2004 res rep. sought to analyze young people’s relationship to culture and cultural consumption by means of several questions. Figure 15: Apart from course books.9 books in 2000. We will not herein present a comprehensive overview of our results. books they read a year. and an average of 8. as the Ifjúság2000 study before it. excluding course books.7 books in 2004. the number of books read in the past year.qxd 2005. The results remain unchanged: young people read an average of 8. we asked young people how many. 09.

We found numbers of young respondents who had never visited certain cultural institutions. museum. Concerning cinemas.g. the Budapest youth ranks first in terms of the consumption of high culture (e. nearly a quarter of the Budapest youth. In respect to printed press. while the same holds true for only 6% of young people from villages. Irrespective of age groups.g. went out to theatres within a two month period. Men own an average of 78 books. Presumably. concert. dances or dinner parties. local discos. SCENES OF ‘CULTURAL CONSUMPTION’ As far as cultural consumption is concerned. A group of young people has emerged. a twofold difference was registered in 2000: within a two months period. in 2004. above 70% of young people . this gap increased. cinemas were frequented three times as much by the capital’s youth than by young people living in villages. while women own an average of 105 books. which relishes in the consumption of “products” associated with cultural elitism. In 2004. nearly three quarters of Budapest’s youth. The discrepancies between Budapest and villages are especially striking in this regard. The less frequented of cultural events were those seen belonging to the cultural elite. Népszabadság is most popular with 12% of the sample’s readers. 10% of them have no books at all. 15% of the Capital’s young people went to theatres within a one-month period. but less than a tenth of villagers. theatre. while 15-29 year olds from villages prefer going to community centers. 4% of young people assert not being in possession of any book to call their own. the superiority of tabloids and local or regional media is determinant. as well as to education. In contrast. and only a third of those living in villages went to cinemas.qxd 2005. we can assert an increase in the societal divide since 2000. As far as gender is concerned. while Magyar Nemzet is read by 5% of respondents. exhibition). Similarly to the data of the Ifjúság2000 study. others are denied the means to cultural consumption. The primary audience for daily political papers is once more the Budapest youth. however. and in turn may come to strengthen the inequality of opportunities for young people.youth2004 res rep. Tabloids are popular in every ‘settlement type’. There are. with the spread of multiplexes. In 2000. To conclude. Among daily political newspapers. library. Although those living with their parents possess 90 books on average. this can be related both to access to such institutions. daily papers that are typical among readers from Budapest (e. However. the “cultural gap” is widening. Young people between 15 and 29 years old are divided in both the quality and the quantity of their ‘cultural consumption’ according to where they reside. In the month preceding our study. 09. 1:56 Page 34 34 Youth2004 Research report There are 344 books on average in each household. the picture drawn is strongly differentiated. Metro). This striking disproportion coincides with differences in the frequency of visits to cultural institutions. 14.

1:56 Page 35 Cultural consumption 35 Figure 16: Institutions visited within a month (by age groups. 10% of county towns’ youth.youth2004 res rep. in 2004) have never been to art-cinemas. and 8% have over six hours of free time per day. we observe that around 12% of 15 to 29 year olds have no more than one hour of free time. We found that leisure activities which young people choose on impulse. around 5% of those between 20 and 24. 13% of young people from other towns. Data indicates that ‘settlement type’ is important in respect to spending one’s free time. and there is. the more his/her free time decreases dramatically. it becomes apparent that the older the respondent. We can easily account for the fact that both the village youth. Around 5% of the 15-29 age group claims not having any free time. in our view a low desire for ambitious social activity. Youth’s choices of cultural activities the data brought to light did not reflect our expectations. 2% of young people between 15 and 29. 27% of them have 4-6 hours. 09. 14. SPENDING FREE TIME Having projected the data of the Ifjúság2004 study onto an average weekday. In other words. the demand for companionship and community spirit rarely appears in our sample. Around 20% of young people do not even go to multiplex cinemas. or classical music concerts. and 8% of young people between 25 and 29 belong to the group whose activities on an average weekday does not allow them any free time. reflect primarily individual activities and decision-making and display a lack of sense of companionship and community spirit. Taking into account the age dimension. and around 12% of young people from villages have no more .qxd 2005. 47% of them have 1-3 hours. operas. and the 25-29 age group are those which frequent multiplex cinemas the less. 15% of Budapest youth.

The question remains: where do young people spend their free time on weekdays? Figure 17: Where do you spend your free time on weekdays? (most often mentioned places. 24% among those in county towns. towns and villages is around 9%. 23% of young people have only a few hours of free time on weekends. while 24% dispose of half a day. 23% among those living in towns and 22% of those living in villages dispose of such a luxury. the proportion of young people with a completely free weekend decreases according to ‘settlement types’: 30% among the capital’s youth. 25% of young people have a whole day of free time. 14. and only 17% among 25 to 29 year olds. 09. in percentages) . Among those having more than six hours of free time.qxd 2005.youth2004 res rep. the proportion of young people from Budapest revolves around 5%. age fundamentally affects the extent of free time disposed of on weekends: the younger the age group. which will need to be examined in the later stages of the study. To sum up. In comparison to weekdays. the amount of free time a youth disposes of depends on his/her social status. one fourth among 20 to 24 year olds. 23% dispose of the entire weekend. Furthermore. The proportion of young people having a whole weekend free is of one third among 15 to 19 year olds. concerning both weekdays and weekends. 1:56 Page 36 36 Youth2004 Research report than one hour of free time. The high ‘free time surplus’ in Budapest can be ascribed to several factors. and 3% of the youth have no free time. while the proportion of young people living in county towns. the more free time they have. the way in which free time is spent on weekends shows significant variations. It can be asserted that the differences of free time in an average weekday are primarily correlated with the dimensions of economic activity and age category. Similarly to weekdays.

56% spend it in dormitories or at home. The locations where free time is spent are correlated to the age and settlement type of young people. The ways in which free time is spent on weekdays in regards to settlement types is the following: 68% of young people from Budapest.qxd 2005. while this hold true for 31% of young people living in villages. Every third young person belonging to the youngest age group spends his/her weekday free time at a friends’ place. Only an insignificant minority of young people go out (to pubs or cafés) or to cultural institutions (1. in percentages) Over half of young people (57%) spend even their weekends at home. or at their friends’ place. 1:57 Page 37 Cultural consumption 37 Results show that. and 76% of young people living in villages stay at home or dormitories.youth2004 res rep. an overwhelming majority of young people simply stay at home (around 73%). In different ‘settlement types’. 09. we conjectured that young people would have a higher demand for social activities on the weekends. Nonetheless. however. 42% of young people from Budapest spend their time with friends. 28% of young people living in Budapest and 19% of those living in villages spend their time at a friends’ place. while 60% of young people between 25 and 29 stay at home and 25% spend it at a friends’ place. while the same is true for about 64% of those living in villages. 14. . On the weekends. 70% of 15 to 19 year olds stay at home or in their dormitory. Figure 18: Where do you spend your free time on weekends? (most often mentioned places. cannot be verified based on the present data. it is worth noticing that around a tenth of young people spend their free time in nature. on weekdays. Our hypothesis.5%. 44% of young people aged between 15 and 19 spend their free time at a friends’ place. Only 5% mention going to sportsgrounds and the same number of them “hangs out” in the streets. figures are the following: 44% of young people living in the capital stay at home or in dormitories. In our preliminary hypothesis.).

Once more. 14. this might result from the fact that spending one’s free time is mainly restricted to the family environment. 1:57 Page 38 38 Youth2004 Research report Figure 19: Young people without a circle of friends by settlement type (in percentages) The existence of a circle of friends is both fundamental and determinant. 09. seems to be correlated to ‘settlement type’. Perhaps.youth2004 res rep. the number of friendless young people is at its highest. whether a youth has a circle of friends. the more likely the individual is to spend time with friends. Our data shows that the younger the age category.qxd 2005. . or not. It is thought-provoking to observe the lack of “closeness” existing in villages. There.

IMPORTANCE OF VALUES We register (with one exception) a relative decrease in the importance of those values that can be termed as material. increase in income. 09. and careers can be regarded as material Table 7: How important are these values to you? (mean value of answers. (Following Inglehart. and register an increase in the importance of those values that can be termed as ‘post-material’. various material goods. where totally unimportant= 1. very important=5) .qxd 2005. 14.youth2004 res rep. 1:57 Page 39 VALUES AND SOCIAL PERSPECTIVES OF YOUNG PEOPLE LIFE PRINCIPLES.

world of beauty. there is stagnation rather than deterioration in the case of generally interpreted “personal situations”. while intimate and close human relationships. In this regard. The answers show a high level of consistency with a question further in the questionnaire. and freedom can be regarded as post-material values). This presumption is supported by the positive shift in judgment concerning the transition which is to be discussed in the next chapter. Every second young person gave an evasive answer. while a fourth of them indicated definite improvement. On the contrary. Despite the fact that since 2000. true friendship) have. and around a further fifth perceive some improvement. As we have seen . independence. This data corresponds with the results of the Ifjúság2000 study. while in comparison more transcendent ideas or values (creativity. Compared to previous years. cultural values. 14. taken on an increasingly central role in the lives of young people. According to slightly over one third of them. It can be generally stated that the youngest age category (15-19 year olds). The only exception concerns values pertaining to the nation’s role. compared to the 2000 results we can talk of an 11% change. 40% of respondents see no change. in recent years. One fifth of them think of the situation as unchanged. In parallel. personal (or familial) situations have deteriorated. Europe. values representing security (peaceful world.youth2004 res rep. such values have lost some of their relative importance. mostly for the benefit of improvement. 09. prosperity.qxd 2005. and thus Hungary. the children of highly qualified parents. respect of traditions. 12% of young people consider their family as ‘winners of the 1989-90 transition. 1:57 Page 40 40 Youth2004 Research report values. According to their own account. they are still regarded unfavorably. which has come to play a less important role in young people’s value systems. principles and values pertaining to self-realization and one’s individual life have come to the front of the stage and have a greater direct impact on everyday actions. and young people from cities perceive a positive effect on their living standards since the transition. social order) lagged behind on the ranking of values. the country’s economic situation has deteriorated since the transition. The relative decline of material principles can surely be explained by the (further) improvement of the country’s economic situation and by the (further) increase in its social stability. PUBLIC OPINION ON THE TRANSITION AND THE FUTURE OF HUNGARY Though developments in the general economic situation are judged less negatively. has seen its prospective for peace and security significantly threatened. According to exactly half of respondents. while one fourth see themselves as ‘losers’. and almost 14% remain uncertain regarding their opinion on the matter.

the majority of respondents expect improvement. or see themselves as rather satisfied. 1:57 Page 41 Cultural consumption 41 Figure 20: Taking everything into account.qxd 2005. developed since the transition? (in percentages) above. Nearly four tenths of young people having answered this question expect positive changes in the economy and living standards. are highly educated and come from families of good social standing. in which category would you classify your family into? (in percentages. how has . young people defining themselves as ‘winners’ are from cities. In relation to future. and 45% expect favorable changes in their own personal Figure 21: Taking everything into account and on the basis of your own experience.. public opinion is characterized by optimism. 09.. 14.youth2004 res rep. As far as questions relating to the future are concerned. by educational level) .

religious. and an additional 22 claimed being members of civil associations. This data has not changed much in four years’ time. Young people are at their most optimistic regarding both living standards. Similarly to the previous survey we noted a preference for organizations such as sport societies or clubs. the better educated or secondary school students of highly qualified fathers in good social . In 2000. our data have improved favorably along two dimensions. Membership to political organizations is altogether below one per cent. political. and their personal situations. In all three cases. charity. By 2004. 14. data concerning party or political youth organization membership was not interpretable since only 32 out of 8000 young people indicated affiliation.qxd 2005. the proportion of ambivalent young people stands at 35%. community. or cultural organization. there have been no significant changes in this respect. how will … change? (in percentages) POLITICAL ACTIVITY The Ifjúság2000 study revealed that less than one sixth of young people are members of a civil organization. and church organizations. Compared to 2000. sport. men. 1:57 Page 42 42 Youth2004 Research report situation. 38 young people reported being members of a party or a youth political organization. or circle. 09.youth2004 res rep. social. Figure 22: If you think about the future. and the proportion of those forecasting deterioration is no more than 30% (20% in the case of personal life strategies). Now 15% of respondents indicate being members of a civil. club. The division in organizational membership can be registered with an aboveaverage frequency of youth belonging to younger age categories.

27% would participate in an allowed political protest. 09. and petition signing. and 18% among their left-wing counterparts. 32% of very interested young people and 11% of completely uninterested young people are members in such organizations.qxd 2005. Subsequently. Also. and the Budapest youth. both tackling important issues and the possibility of doing something good for the community was mentioned by 7% of respondents. which require a relatively small amount of time or energy to be invested in. there is no doubt that the more interested a young person is in politics. we observe that young people standing in the middle of the ideological spectrum have a lower than average rate of participation in political organizations. and it is their members who have the best opportunities to lead successful carriers and lives. in the first place. Young members of such organizations seem to have. Young people with rather conservative principles have greater organizational potential. The majority of young people who have no membership to any organization explained having a lack of either interest or time (39 and 36 percent respectively). The second most popular reason for joining is having the opportunity to represent one’s interests (14%). political protests.youth2004 res rep. In light of an important issue or an unusual situation. and thus. 14. 38% would take part in a permitted strike. 1:57 Page 43 Values and social perspectives of young people 43 positions. around one third of the 4000 questioned young people (replying to a written and confidential questionnaire) indicated that they had already taken part in one or more acts of protest. The protest potential is much higher than the actual level of participation. Examining the question from the viewpoint of public life. and 21% would join a half lane road blocking. Concerning direct political activity and protest potential. the more likely he/she will be a member of an organization. which can most easily accommodate the time restrictions required by organizational membership. This figure is above 20% among right-wing 15-29 year olds. 35% would take part in civil initiative. joined because of their friends or community (38%). civil initiatives. However it is worth noting that these are the groups disposing of the most free time. Hardly 1% of respondents would participate in a non-permitted form of protest and another percent would partake in a violent form of protest. These groups can be regarded as the ‘winners’ of the transition. Similar tendencies can be observed along the liberal-conservative axis. and the third relates to the influence of school (influence of fellow students and teachers: 10%). . 56% would sign a petition. Young people aged 15-29 prefer non-violent and legal acts.

In comparison. In our opinion. aimlessness and uncertainty which feeds the birth and growth of these forms of deviant behavior. Vocational training school students and vocational secondary school students are mostly concerned by the spread of drugs and alcohol. this can be accounted for by the fact that drug use is valued as a serious problem by all social groups. Their role has been overtaken by factors that are. 15-19 year olds. The frequency of unemployment being mentioned has halved. Destitution and housing issues have slipped back to the seventh and ninth place on the list. 14. it is for the oldest group that problems relating to their future. the spread of drugs and alcohol is a problem to be valued more so than in the case of other age groups. In villages. It is surprising to note that. and can be regarded as ways of responding to them. It is hopelessness. 09. young people attending university or college are concerned to a larger extent by immaterial or emotional . the spread of drugs is not distributed along ‘settlement types’. while it is young people living in villages who suffer the most from alcohol problems. hopelessness and aimlessness become proportionally central. the Budapest youth reports becoming independent and housing difficulties as major problems in much higher proportions than the national average. Previously. is concerned. Those basic problems which formerly had absolute priority. 1:57 Page 44 PROBLEMS FACING TODAY’S YOUTH Significant change has occurred over the past four years concerning how we may perceive youth’s problems. or housing issues have lagged behind. As far as the youngest age category. Nowadays. directly or indirectly connected to fundamental social problems. In comparison to others. There have also been important changes in other forms of deviant behavior: alcohol has become one of the four most important issues.qxd 2005. The problem map of young people currently in the educational system shows important differences in respect to types of school. after all. such as unemployment. the significance of unemployment and destitution is dominant.youth2004 res rep. Similarly to the 2000 study. destitution. the drug issue ranked fifth. the spread of drugs undoubtedly is the most important source of concern for young people aged between 15 and 29. Unemployment mainly affects young people aged 20-24 who are beginning their careers in the labor market.

hopelessness. 09. 1:57 Page 45 Values and social perspectives of young people 45 problems. 14.youth2004 res rep. moral deterioration. lack of culture and family crises. Figure 23: What do you consider the most vital problem of youth? (cumulative percentage distribution of the two most important answers) .qxd 2005. such as aimlessness.

. . . . . . 28 Figure 12: Do you smoke? (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Figure 13: How often have you drunk alcohol in the past year? (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in 2000 and 2004) . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Figure 4: How many children do you have? In 2000 and in 2004 (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 8: Average income of households per consumer unit by ‘settlement type’ (in HUF) . . . in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 7: Have you ever been unemployed? (by group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Figure 22: If you think about the future. . . . . . . . . . . . in 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Figure 20: Taking everything into account. . 27 Figure 11: Does your household have internet access? (in percentages of respondents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Figure 16: Institutions visited within a month (by age groups.youth2004 res rep. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in 2000 and 2004) . . . . . . . the number of books read in the past year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Figure 15: Apart from course books. . . . . . . . . . . . how has … developed since the transition? (in percentages) . . . . . . . 11 Figure 3: Distribution of women’s marital status according to age category (in percentages) . . . . . . . . 1:57 Page 46 Index of figures and tables Figure 1: Distribution of young people by marital status (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . in which category would you classify your family into? (in percentages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in 2000 and 2004 . . . . . 35 Figure 17: Where do you spend your free time on weekdays? (most often mentioned places. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Figure 10: Do you use a PC? (in percentages of respondents. . . . . 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in percentages within a given group) . . . . . . . . . . 09. . . . . 23 Figure 9: Possession of PCs in young people’s households in 2000 and 2004 (in percentages of respondents) . . . . . . 30 Figure 14: Have you ever tried drugs? (in percentages of people answering to the question) . . . . . 13 Figure 5: Occupational structure of working young people between 15 and 29 (gender-specific distribution) . . . . . . in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . .qxd 2005. . . . 37 Figure 19: Young people without a circle of friends by settlement type (in percentages) . . 10 Figure 2: Distribution of men’s marital status by age category (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Figure 21: Taking everything into account and on the basis of your own experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Figure 23: What do you consider the most vital problem of youth? (cumulative percentage distribution of the two most important answers) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 18: Where do you spend your free time on weekends? (most often mentioned places. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 6: Occupational distribution of working young people between 15 and 29 by ‘settlement’ type (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . how will … change? (in percentages) . . by educational level) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . and in 2004 (in percentages) . very important=5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .qxd 2005. . . . . . . . 15 Table 3: Participation in education of 15 to 29 year olds according to father’s educational level (in percentages) . . . . . . where totally unimportant= 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .youth2004 res rep. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 4: Distribution of university and college students by the father’s qualifications in 2000 and 2004 (in percentages) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Table 7: How important are these values to you? (mean value of answers. . . . . . . . . 23 Table 6: Where do you live most of the year? (in percentages) . . . . . . 14 Table 2: Distribution of students in education by type of school in 2000. . . . . 1:57 Page 47 Index of figures and tables 47 Table 1: Participation in education in 2000 and in 2004 respectively by age groups (in percentages) . . . . by region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 5: Average income of households per consumer unit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1:57 Page 48 48 Youth2004 Research report .qxd 2005.youth2004 res rep. 14. 09.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful