The Human Development Index (HDI) is a good “litmus paper” for measuring the quality of education systems, health care, and income of the population. According to the latest HDI rating, Kazakhstan closes the list of countries with a “very high level of human development”, being in 58th place (out of 189). It is worth noting that only three of CIS countries belong to this group (including Russia and Belarus).

But this "success” is illusive. Since 2012, our position in the rating has remained unchanged. Moreover, there is a drop in growth rates: if in the period from 2000 to 2010, the annual growth rate of HDI was 1.12%, then in the next decade it fell by 2 times - to 0.62%. In order to enter the desired “top thirty”, the country must at least* increase the following indicators:
- life expectancy by 7.7 years
- per capita income - PPP by 6 thousand US dollars.

And this is on the condition that other countries' indicators remain the same.

In that case, the question to which we should answer is: "What prevents Kazakhstan from "jumping" up the table? The most obvious way to reduce this gap is for the government to introduce a number of changes aimed at improving education and health indicators. However, today we propose to consider the other side of the coin - the population.

Factors that are far more abstract than the number of years spent in school - values - may be a potential clue. Returning to the Cultural Dimensions of Geert Hofstede, which we discussed earlier, we can find an interesting trend among the " top thirty" of HDI: most countries have a low distance from aouthorities and a high level of individualism. In other words, citizens of these states are more likely to play an active role in the development of the country, controlling and balancing the government, as well as acting as initiators of “bottom-up” reforms and better perceive reforms in general.

Kazakhstan, in turn, shows the opposite picture: we have an incredibly high level of distance from authorities and a low level of individualism. Our society is characterized by an expectation of “from above" initiatives and low readiness for reforms: citizens are interested in maintaining stability. As a result, the accessory inertia and the desire to maintain the status quo can negatively affect the country's progress on the human development ladder.

Does this mean that it is all people's fault and the state is not involved? Of course no. But when exploring ways of further growth, it is necessary to consider the entire chain: from agent to principal.

*in comparison with the indicators of Estonia (30th place)