27.11.2023
Unseen Glue: Social Capital in Ukraine
We present a survey of social capital in Ukraine, conducted by the Sociological Group "Rating" at the request of the transformation communications activity supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), implemented by Chemonics international inc. The content is the sole responsibility of its authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of usaid or the U.S. government.
"Social capital is the potential for mutual trust and mutual assistance that arises in relationships between people: obligations and expectations, information exchange, and social norms. Forms of social capital include organizational, mobilization resources, resources of social cohesion and social assistance."
James Coleman, American sociologist.
Executive summary:
● The Ukrainian society in general had a positive radius of trust: there were slightly more people who trusted others than those who did not. Nevertheless, a more detailed analysis revealed a significant difference across the age groups. The oldest were the most open to others, while the youngest were the most closed-off. Generally speaking, the problem of youth, both in Ukraine and in Western societies, is one of the challenges in the modern world. This situation is detrimental to the social capital, as the relatively higher level of distrust among young people, who are the main and most prospective basis contributing to the country’s human development, weakens the social capital. Deeper studies and strategies are needed to overcome this phenomenon.
● The research findings also confirmed the hypotheses that the level of openness and trust in others in the social groups depends on the level of income. People with higher incomes demonstrated a much higher level of openness than those with lower incomes. However, the income scale is subjective, and the group of individuals with the highest income in the Ukrainian reality is often represented by a strong middle class rather than by the truly rich.
● Despite the «average» level of trust in other people and demonstration of social cohesion, a breakdown by categories revealed a contradiction in the social mindset regarding the attitude to others. A relatively positive balance of trust/distrust in others in general was primarily shaped by an extremely high level of trust in the close circle (immediate family members and relatives). Family is one of the most important social institutions in Ukraine. Behavioral patterns in the family are often projected onto other communities. Nepotism, clannishness, and concealment of crimes are derivatives of this relationship model. Yet when it comes to strangers, people of a different nationality or those with different political views, the level of distrust towards these categories of population was significant. This is a significant risk factor in view of historical contradictions and ideological differences in Ukrainian society. On the other hand, propensity to collectivism and sacrifice of personal interests for the sake of the group are a significant advantage in a crisis, particularly in times of war. Volunteering, neighborhood associations, and a system of horizontal ties became the cornerstone of defense in the first months of the full-scale war and were examples of social mobilization in times of crisis. It is confirmed with a high level of trust in charity foundations and CSOs, which has been recorded since 2014 and was also confirmed by this research. The phenomenon paves the way for further development of social capital and building of a new decentralized model of interactions within society.
● The average indicator of trust in central and local government authorities, as an important component of the social capital, is currently a wartime phenomenon rather than an ordinary situation. Since the first days of the war, polls have recorded a rapid increase in trust in Ukraine’s key government agencies caused by a shift in the society’s focus from priority issues (firstly, economic development and government corruption) to defense and security. The State as an institution had maximum capabilities and powers over these matters, so distrust in key government authorities during the war was perceived as a sign of betrayal. Nevertheless, socio-economic challenges and corruption issues will likely return once the hostilities end, which traditionally leads to a drop in trust in the central government. In addition, the role of the State as a central power institution in Ukrainian society is «blurred» due to partial abolishment of the social contract. The norms and values of the State in such a situation were perceived as a mere declaration rather than as a foundation for law and order. On the other hand, trust in local authorities has the potential to grow under favorable conditions, given the success of decentralization and better opportunities to liaise with citizens, and demonstrate success during postwar reconstruction.
● The media are an important tool for building social capital in the context of the all-out digitalization and informatization. Building trust as an important component of social capital today strongly depends on the quality and content of information shared almost instantly through various channels. In addition, the attitude to the freedom of speech as a keystone of a democratic society is an important indicator of the type of society and whether social capital is being built in it. In times of war, when state propaganda can be an element of defense and struggle against the enemy, Ukrainians were also quite critical of the information they were given, even though they agreed with the need for this tool in times of crisis. The survey showed that society preferred independent and «fast» online media and social media where they could access any public information. Freedom of expression is a fundamental development pillar for Ukrainians. On the other hand, there is a threat that these channels often disseminate unverified facts or sensitive topics that can lead to social confrontation. As the research showed, political intolerance often resulted in confrontation on social media that were free platforms for expressing opinions. Therefore, media literacy, the ability to identify fakes, and a critical approach to the shared information are essential for building the social capital in the Ukrainian society, which is highly vulnerable in the information landscape amid the fullscale war.
● Ukrainian society showed an extremely high level of togetherness when it came to confronting the enemy. The polls showed a rise in national (primarily pro-Ukrainian), civic, and language identity during the war. Today, there is an overwhelming consensus on major ideological issues, such as foreign policy or history, which saw a regional divide before February 2022. Such cohesion lays strong foundations for building social capital. On the other hand, the idea of social unity is not yet dominant because of the long-term confrontation on ideological grounds, which was often played on by political parties in their election campaigns. There was also no consolidation in assessing the effectiveness of reforms and the European future, although the support for EU accession exceeded 80%. Yet, the social groups that were committed to the accession to the EU, positively perceived reforms, spoke about the ideological unity of the Ukrainian society, showed a higher level of trust in all its branches, led a more public and sophisticated social life, and were more likely to be civic activists, were an essential basis for Ukraine’s social capital.
Methodology
Audience: the population of Ukraine aged 18+ across all the regions except for the temporarily occupied territories of the Crimea and Donbas, as well as the areas not covered by the Ukrainian mobile operators at the time of the research. The weights are assigned to the results based on the latest data from the State Statistics Service of Ukraine. The sample is representative by age, type of locality, and region of residence. Study population: 2,000 respondents. Survey method: CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing). Based on random sampling of mobile phone numbers. Statistical sampling error (with a 0.95 confidence interval): no more than 2.2% for values close to 50%, no more than 1.9% for values close to 25%, no more than 1.3% for values close to 10%, no more than 0.8% for values close to 5%.