Emigration as a way out of negative experiences in the post-Soviet reality: subjective reflections on civic participation, labor experience, and emotional state

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes non-economic reasons for emigration, demonstrating how the situation before emigration might become important for the emigration decision. It aims to examine how migrants’ subjective accounts of civic participation, labor experience, and emotional state are associated with migrant clusters formed based on socioeconomic characteristics. The article discusses structural conditions of the transition period that might have impacted public attitudes and expectations toward the chosen areas of analysis. The research is based on a public poll carried out among Lithuanians who have emigrated to various European countries. The research showed that both civic space and labor environment can become a source of negative emotions.

KEYWORDS:

• Emigration
• subjective reflections
• Lithuania
• cluster analysis

Acknowledgments

This article has been published with the support of a Research Grant for Emerging Scholars from the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author

Notes

1. Due to emigration during the first 30 years since the restoration of independence the Lithuanian population decreased by more than 700,000. See European Migration Network (2022).

2. This is what social psychologists talk about when they notice the lack of socio-psychological skills, which results in self-destructive behavior within central and eastern European societies (especially among men) (Pūras 2019 See also Stankūnas et al. 2006).

3. During the revival period, Lithuania’s hopes for the future were linked not only to the independence of the state but also to the freedom of society and individuals, a truly functioning local government, private property, and fair competition according to the rules established by law. Meanwhile, an essential sign of the recent decade of Lithuanian politics, under the guise of building a market economy and the efficiency of public interest management, was the pursuit of undemocratic centralism – from forest enterprises to higher education institutions, and from heating, gas, and electricity to a largely uncontrollable memory culture (Aleksandravičius 2019).

4. Various aspects specific to post-Soviet realities are constantly discussed in academic literature in Lithuania (see Baločkaitė 2004; Žiliukaitė 2005; Ramonaitė 2007; Spurga 2008; Mažeikis 2010; Jokubaitis 2019; Leonavičius, Žilys, and Baltrušaitytė 2021).

5. In the case of Scandinavia, the dominant country is Norway, but Sweden, Finland, and Denmark are also covered. In the case of the United Kingdom, England is the dominant country, but Northern Ireland and Scotland are also covered. In the case of southern Europe, the dominant country is Spain, but France, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Belgium, and the Netherlands are also covered.

6. The public poll was conducted on behalf of Vytautas Magnus University researchers, sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania.

7. According to the data of the European Migration Network (EMN), in 2019 more than 72% of emigrants from Lithuania were 15–44 years old (European Migration Network 2022). Previous research conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania shows that more than 80% of emigrants have a higher education degree and 79% are active labor market participants (although it does not specify the more detailed distribution of the workforce) (Vilmorus 2013).

8. The participants of the survey were offered five categories to choose from, which reveal both their subjective evaluation and conceptual differences. The categories were as follows: ‘We did not have enough money even for food’ (below the poverty line); ‘We had enough money for food, but it was very difficult to buy clothes’ (the edge of poverty line); ‘We had enough money for food and clothing, and we could save some, but it was not enough to make a bigger purchase (like a TV or fridge)’ (relative poverty line); ‘We had access to some expensive items, such as a TV, fridge, and others, but we could not afford very expensive purchases (apartment, bungalow, and so on)’ (middle class); ‘We could afford to buy whatever we wanted’ (wealthy class).

9. Respondents’ participation in various civic activities (environmental actions, community activities, public organizations, donations) showed a tendency that quite a large part (42.7–47.1%) of all cluster representatives rarely participate in civic activities, that is, non-systematically. Some 34.7% of all respondents never participated in civic activities. This option was least likely to be chosen by the potential (23.5%) respondents, the tendencies of nonparticipation in the cases of the learning youth and precariat were similar: in the case of Cluster 1 (learning youth), 39.2% of respondents; and in the case of Cluster 2 (precariat) slightly more, at 39.5%.

10. The research revealed that the number of those delegating responsibility for the wellbeing of public life to the government was significantly higher (48.1%) than those who think that it is the responsibility of society itself (30.4%).

11. It should be noted that waves of Lithuanian emigration are related to specific events (such as joining the EU and opening borders, the global financial crisis in 2007–2008, or on the contrary, rapid economic growth) which might impact the attitude of respondents (that is, the image they have at the specific time of emigration). On the other hand, a degree of disappointment was always a leading characteristic among Lithuanian emigrants (for the overview of the differences in attitude among Lithuanian emigrants see Genys and Krikštolaitis (2018).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the This article has been supported with the Research Grant for Emerging Scholars by the Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies .

Notes on contributors

Dainius Genys

Dainius Genys is a sociologist at Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas. He has written on issues related to civil society, democratization processes, migration, and energy security. His PhD dissertation was entitled “The Boundaries of Lithuanian Civil Society and Conflicts for it.” Recently, he has focused on analyzing the interactions between social capital and dynamics of the emotional state of society, especially in the context of Lithuanian emigration. Genys is a member of the Lithuanian Sociological Association, European Sociological Association, Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies, and the Energy Policy Research Group.