The Estonian economy is volatile
Life satisfaction is very low
The size of Estonia does not explain high volatility
The rapid recovery is uneven
Fiscal policy should have been less procyclical
Credit growth has been excessive
Macroprudential policy tools are gaining importance
Some groups are at a very high risk of unemployment
Active labour market policies need to be reinforced
Reducing skill mismatches requires expanding lifelong learning
Improving school-to-job transition is priority
Estonian firms export low and medium technological goods to a small number of partners
Private sector expenditure in R&D remains low
Energy and emission intensities are high
Economic crisis had a strong negative impact on the poor
Transfers (other than pensions) are small and untargeted with limited impact on inequality
The number of permanent incapacity to work benefit recipients increased rapidly in the crisis
The disability system provides few integration measures
The size of unemployment assistance benefit should be increased
Family benefits are high relative to the spending on childcare services
Health outcomes are weak
Low-earners face high labour tax wedge that discourages employment
A high level of job destruction during the crisis
Despite strong recovery, labour market has not fully recovered
Recovery is accompanied by a strong reallocation of labour
Unemployed-to-vacancy ratio
Ethnic non-Estonians were strongly hurt during the crisis
Youth and low educated were strongly hurt during the crisis
Long term unemployment rate is high
Expenditures on active labour market policies are low
Job mediation counsellors' caseload is still high in many counties
The distribution of activation programmes is skewed towards training and wage subsidies
Impact of training on employment rate
At-risk groups in the labour market engage less in lifelong learning
Small firms invest less in lifelong learning
Participation in lifelong learning became skewed to very short courses
Teacher salaries remain one of the lowest of the OECD
Completion rate in education could be improved
Youth with vocational education perform weakly relative to those with general education
Tertiary education attainment is high in Estonia, but the dynamic has stalled and the return from education is low
Participation in tertiary education is low for students with weak socio-economic backgrounds
Poverty in Estonia is higher than the OECD average
Economic crisis had a strong negative impact on the poor (graph)
Transfers (other than old-age pensions) are small and untargeted with limited impact on inequality
The poverty among unemployed is among the highest in the EU
There is scope to simultaneously lower poverty and increase employment
Ratio between spending on disability and unemployment is high
The size of spending on income-tested programmes is the lowest in the OECD
Disability is the only large transfer program that redistributes to the poor
The number of permanent incapacity to work benefit recipients increased rapidly in the crisis (graph)
Disability system is not generous, but does not promote outflows
The disability system provides few integration measures: Integration policy dimension: country scores (0-5), around 2007
Employment rate among the disabled is high
Unemployment benefits coverage is low
Half of registered unemployed do not receive any benefits
Employment record requirements are relatively strict compared to job search obligations
Unemployment assistance benefit is very low
Subsistence benefits are low in international comparison
There is still much scope to increase both fertility and female employment rates
Maternity and paternity leaves are exceptionally generous in Estonia
Low spending on childcare might contribute to low enrolment rates
Health outcomes are weak: Life expectancy at birth, 2010
There is a large health gap due to income status
Access to adequate healthcare is an issue
High share of out-of-pockets spending on pharmaceuticals contributes to unequal access
Low-earners face high labour tax wedge that discourages employment: Average tax wedge on labour at 67% of average worker earnings, single person without children, % of compensation, 2010
Property taxation is the source of potentially large non-distortionary revenues