in the initial years plummeted and saw the proportion of people in the least happy categories soar (Blanchflower and Freeman 1997; Lelkes, 2006a and 2006b ; Angelescu, 2008). By 2011, there is still a considerable gap in subjective well-being between transitional and no transitional countries, even though smaller than after the initial reforms (Lelkes, 2006b).

# **3. Individual and National Level Data**

**The individual-level data used for this study comes from the Life in Transition Survey collected in 2006.** This survey was collected by the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the World Bank (WB). Although the LiTs was conducted in 2010 as well, the study focuses on the 2006 round to capture perceptions in a period of economic boom – to avoid results being driven by the impact of the global economic crisis – and given the more comprehensive information on labor histories collected in the 2006 round. Perceptions on economic mobility in 2010 are, however, presented in annexes as well to complement the analysis. It collected information about socio-demographics characteristics and attitudes and values of the population in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Turkey. It covered 29 countries, with a sample of 1,000 households per country.<sup>4</sup>

**The respondent of the survey is a random member of the household interviewed older than 18 years old.** The survey is divided in two sections. The first one was answered by the household head and contains the household roster and the variables on perceptions of economic mobility. The second part is answered by a randomly selected household member older than 18 years old, and contains information on employment, employment history since 1989 and an extensive set of questions on attitudes and values. We merged the information coming from the two respondents in the household. This implies we assume the answer given by the household head is representative of the household opinion.

**Personal and household characteristics used for the estimations are constructed based on the data available in the employment and household characteristics sections.** We used this information to obtain the age, education, ethnicity, religion, and employment status of the respondent. Also, we used this section for the education of the father. We used the household characteristics to construct the location (urban/rural), household size, consumption and assets owned, and the shares of children and seniors. We also extracted information about the education of the father, as an indicator of condition that cannot be affected by the individual, to test whether they play a role in the perceptions of mobility.

**Attitudes and beliefs are obtained from the module of opinions included in the survey, which covered perceptions about the dynamics of the society and valuation of institutions.** For the variable on trust in public institutions, we constructed an index based on trust in five public institutions (Presidency, Cabinet of Ministers, Parliament, Judges and Police). For each institution, the original variables were coded in 5 categories, ranging from distrust to full trust. We collapse this information in three categories and construct an index that can take three values (-1, 0, or 1) corresponding to distrust, neutral or trust in each institution. The aggregate index is the arithmetic average. For fairness, we used a question on what the respondent beliefs is rewarded in society, either effort and intelligence, or contacts and corruption/criminal ties. For market economy support, we took a question asking to express a preference between a market economy or a centrally planned one. Finally,

> 4 It included Mongolia, EBRD country of operation since 2006, and part of the World Bank East Asia and Pacific Region. Turkey is not an EBRD country of operation. Turkmenistan was not included.

8 | P a g e