Eneli Kindsiko, the chief editor of the "Estonian Human Development Report 2026," responds to Peeter Espak's criticisms presented in his February 19, 2026 article. Kindsiko advocates for critical analysis of research findings in public discourse, but she underscores the need for discussions to be rooted in a thorough understanding of the entirety of the data and methodologies used. She aims to clarify misconceptions and misinterpretations made by Espak regarding the report’s conclusions.

One of the primary arguments brought forth by Espak is that the report overemphasizes the mother's income while neglecting the effects of the father's income. Kindsiko addresses this point, highlighting that the report's findings are based on a multifaceted analysis that considers both parents' contributions to household income and its implications for human development. She suggests that the complete picture of familial income dynamics is crucial for understanding the report's insights and recommends that discussions should transcend oversimplifications.

Moreover, Kindsiko insists that while critique is healthy in academic and public debate, it must be constructive and informed. She emphasizes that the discourse around the Human Development Report should facilitate informed decision-making and effective policy formulation, rather than be swayed by ideological biases or misinterpretations. Her response is a call for a more nuanced and holistic approach to understanding human development in Estonia and stresses the significance of critical scrutiny that respects data integrity.