News and Press releases

• According to the results of a joint sociological survey conducted by three polling organizations (KIIS, the Razumkov Centre, and Rating Group), 35% of respondents believe that the situation in the country will improve as a result of the presidential elections scheduled for March 31, 2019 (over the last quarter this indicator increased from 31% to 35%). At the same time, 32% believe that the situation will not change, while 10% have negative expectations regarding the elections. A relatively higher level of optimism about improvements after the elections is observed among supporters of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Yuliya Tymoshenko, and Petro Poroshenko. The most negative expectations are recorded among those who do not intend to vote.
• A total of 84% of respondents declare their readiness to take part in the presidential election.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy remains the leader of the presidential rating, with 27.7% support among those who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Yuliya Tymoshenko is supported by 16.6%, Petro Poroshenko by 16.4%. Arseniy Hrytsenko would receive 9.7%, Yuriy Boyko 8.4%, Oleh Lyashko 5.3%, Oleksandr Vilkul 4.0%, and Ihor Smeshko 3.7%. Support for other candidates is below 2%.
• At this point, nearly one in four respondents has not yet decided on their choice. The highest share of undecided voters is observed in Halychyna, the North, the Center, and the East of the country.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy has the strongest electoral positions in the South and East, as well as in the Center, West, North, and in the capital. Yuliya Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko have stronger positions in the central and western macro-regions. Arseniy Hrytsenko performs best in the West and Halychyna, while Yuriy Boyko and Oleksandr Vilkul are strongest in the South, East, and Donbas. Oleh Lyashko has relatively higher support in the West, Center, and North.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the leader of support among young and middle-aged voters, while Yuliya Tymoshenko leads among older voters. Zelenskyy, Poroshenko, and Hrytsenko are relatively more often supported by men, whereas Tymoshenko is more often supported by women.
• The highest anti-rating among candidates belongs to Petro Poroshenko: almost half of voters would not vote for him under any circumstances. Around 30% would not vote for Yuliya Tymoshenko, 20% for Yuriy Boyko, 18% for Oleh Lyashko, 14% for Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and 11% for Oleksandr Vilkul.
• Second-round modeling produced the following results: Yuliya Tymoshenko leads in a runoff against Petro Poroshenko (26% vs. 19%). At the same time, Volodymyr Zelenskyy defeats both Petro Poroshenko (39% vs. 18%) and Yuliya Tymoshenko (34% vs. 21%).
• Six political parties have a chance of entering parliament. The leader is the Servant of the People party, supported by 24.8% of respondents who have decided and intend to vote. Support for Batkivshchyna stands at 17.6%, for BPP Solidarity at 14.7%, for Civic Position at 9.3%, for Opposition Platform at 9.2%, and for the Radical Party at 5.3%. Support for the Opposition Bloc is 4.4%, for Svoboda 3.1%, and for Samopomich 2.5%. Nearly 30% of respondents have not yet decided on their choice of political party.
• The highest level of support for the Servant of the People party is recorded in the South and East of the country; for Batkivshchyna in the Center; for BPP Solidarity in Halychyna; and for the Opposition Platform and Opposition Bloc in the south-eastern regions and in Donbas.
• A total of 65% of respondents stated that they had not personally encountered cases of vote-buying during this presidential election campaign. At the same time, 27% reported such experiences: 6% personally and 21% through relatives or acquaintances. Reports of vote-buying were most frequent among residents of the South, Donbas, the North, and the capital.
• Forty-two percent of respondents expect significant electoral fraud in the presidential election on March 31, 2019. Another 41% believe that fraud will be minor, and only 6% do not expect any falsifications at all. The highest expectations of large-scale fraud are observed among residents of the South, supporters of Oleksandr Vilkul and Yuriy Boyko, as well as among those who do not intend to vote.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by Rating Group in early March 2019, 69% of respondents believe that affairs in Ukraine are moving in the wrong direction, while 16% hold the opposite view. Over the past month, the share of those who negatively assess the situation in the country has slightly increased.
• A total of 84% of respondents, to one degree or another, declare their readiness to take part in the presidential election on March 31, 2019. The highest level of unequivocal readiness to come to polling stations is observed among residents of the West, the oldest respondents, and supporters of Petro Poroshenko, Ruslan Koshulynskyi, and Ihor Smeshko.
• Among the factors that could prevent respondents from voting at polling stations, the most significant are possible provocations, queues at polling stations, and information about vote buying — these factors received scores of 2.1, 2.0, and 1.9 respectively (measured on a 5-point scale, where 1 means “will not interfere at all” and 5 means “will strongly interfere”). Less significant factors are bad weather (1.7) and having vacation plans (1.8).
• As of the end of the second week of March, Volodymyr Zelenskyy remains the leader of the presidential rating, supported by 24.9% of those who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Yuliya Tymoshenko ranks second (18.8%), followed by Petro Poroshenko (17.4%). Yuriy Boyko would receive 10.2%, Arseniy Hrytsenko 9.4%, Oleh Lyashko 5.8%, Oleksandr Vilkul 3.5%, Ihor Smeshko 3.1%, and Ruslan Koshulynskyi 2.2%. Over the past week, the electoral positions of the leading candidates have remained virtually unchanged.
• One in six respondents has not yet decided on a candidate. Notably, the highest share of undecided voters is among the poorest respondents, rural residents, and women.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy has the strongest electoral positions in the south-eastern regions and in the Center of the country. Yuliya Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko are strongest in the Center and the West, Arseniy Hrytsenko in the West, and Yuriy Boyko in the East. At the same time, Zelenskyy is the leader of electoral preferences in cities, while Tymoshenko leads in rural areas. Zelenskyy is the leading candidate among young and middle-aged voters, while Tymoshenko leads among older voters. Zelenskyy, Poroshenko, and Hrytsenko are relatively more often supported by men, whereas Tymoshenko is more often supported by women.
• Petro Poroshenko tops the candidates’ anti-rating: nearly half of voters would not vote for him under any circumstances. About 30% would not vote for Yuliya Tymoshenko, 19% for Yuriy Boyko, 17% for Oleh Lyashko, 13% for Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and 12% for Oleksandr Vilkul.
• A total of 20.8% of respondents believe that Petro Poroshenko will become the next president. Victory for Volodymyr Zelenskyy is expected by 19.5%, and for Yuliya Tymoshenko by 18.6%. Thus, according to this indicator, the leading candidates are almost level. Only about 3% believe in the victory of Yuriy Boyko or Arseniy Hrytsenko. Over the past month, confidence in Zelenskyy’s victory has increased, while confidence in Poroshenko’s victory has slightly declined.
• Second-round modeling produced the following results: Yuliya Tymoshenko leads in a runoff against Petro Poroshenko (28% vs. 19%). At the same time, Volodymyr Zelenskyy wins in pairings with Petro Poroshenko (39% vs. 19%), with Yuliya Tymoshenko (35% vs. 22%), and with Arseniy Hrytsenko (34% vs. 26%).
• The parliamentary rating is led by the Servant of the People party, supported by 22.4% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Batkivshchyna is supported by 19.1%, BPP Solidarity by 15.8%, the Opposition Platform by 10.2%, Civic Position by 7.9%, the Radical Party by 6.1%, Svoboda by 3.6%, and the Opposition Bloc and Samopomich by 3.2% each. Other parties receive less than 2% support.
• Nearly one quarter of respondents have not yet decided on their party choice. Over the past month, the positions of the leading parties have strengthened. In terms of dynamics, Civic Position and BPP Solidarity gained the most support, while Samopomich lost ground.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by Rating Group in early March 2019, almost two thirds of respondents stated that they always take part in elections, while another 22% said that they almost always vote. Four percent of respondents indicated that they would be voting for the first time. Only 10% said that they almost never or never vote. The highest share of the latter group is among the youngest respondents and residents of Kyiv.
• A total of 83% of respondents, to one degree or another, declare their readiness to take part in the presidential election on March 31, 2019. Among supporters of all leading candidates, around 80% express readiness to vote. A relatively lower level of mobilization is observed among the youngest age groups (18–25 and 26–35 years) and in Kyiv.
• At the same time, when assessing the probability of their participation in voting on March 31, 2019 on a 10-point scale, only about two thirds expressed the highest level of confidence that they would come to vote. Relatively fewer such respondents are found among the youngest age group aged 18–25 (46%) and among those who are still undecided about their choice (64%). Among those who always vote in elections, more than 80% demonstrate the highest confidence. At the same time, among those who stated that they almost always participate in voting, this share is 42%, and among first-time voters it is 55%.
• Eighty-two percent of respondents stated that they know exactly where their polling station is located. A relatively lower level of awareness about the voting location is observed among younger respondents, residents of Kyiv and Donbas, those who will be voting for the first time, or those who vote very rarely.
• At the same time, only 18% of respondents have already checked whether their name is included in the voter lists.
• Forty-four percent of respondents stated that they usually vote in the morning, between 8 a.m. and 12 p.m. Another 22% usually vote between 12 p.m. and 3 p.m., 10% between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m., and only 5% after 6 p.m. Morning voting is preferred mainly by the oldest voters, while younger people tend to prefer midday and afternoon hours. Regionally, a relatively higher share of those who vote in the morning is observed among residents of the southern and central regions as well as Donbas, while in Halychyna a relatively higher share vote between 12 p.m. and 3 p.m. Among those who usually vote in elections, the majority do so in the morning, with the highest shares among voters of Yuliya Tymoshenko, Yuriy Boyko, and Oleh Lyashko.
• Only one third of respondents expressed readiness to stand in line at a polling station for more than one hour. At the same time, one third are willing to wait up to half an hour, and another one fifth up to one hour. The most “resilient” voters are in the East, North, and Halychyna, among the oldest respondents, and among voters of Oleksandr Vilkul and Yuriy Boyko. In contrast, supporters of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Oleh Lyashko, and those who are undecided expressed the least willingness to stand in line for a long time to cast their vote.
• Seventy-four percent of respondents stated that they are ready to sacrifice leisure time in order to vote in elections. At the same time, 16% hold the opposite view and would rather spend time with friends and not go to vote if they had to choose only one option. The highest share of the latter group is among the youngest respondents (18–25 years – 34%, 26–35 years – 23%), first-time voters (30%), and those who rarely participate in elections (45%).
• Among the actors of the electoral process, international observers enjoy the highest level of trust (71%). Almost two thirds trust observers from civic organizations, law enforcement officers ensuring order at polling stations, members of precinct election commissions, and sociologists conducting exit polls. Observers from candidates are trusted by 58%, while the Central Election Commission is trusted by only 49% (38% do not trust it).
• Among presidential candidates, Volodymyr Zelenskyy enjoys a relatively higher level of trust (43%). High levels of trust are also recorded for Yuliya Tymoshenko (28%), Anatoliy Hrytsenko (26%), and Petro Poroshenko (24%). Oleh Lyashko is trusted by 19% of respondents, Yuriy Boyko by 18%, Andriy Sadovyi by 17%, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk by 16%, Oleksandr Shevchenko by 13%, Ihor Smeshko by 13%, Oleksandr Vilkul by 12%, and Yevhenii Muraiev by 10%.
• At the same time, the highest levels of distrust are recorded for Petro Poroshenko (69%) and Oleh Lyashko (71%).
• The leader of the presidential rating is Volodymyr Zelenskyy, supported by 24.7% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Yuliya Tymoshenko ranks second (18.3%), and Petro Poroshenko third (16.8%). Anatoliy Hrytsenko would receive 10.3%, Yuriy Boyko 9.9%, Oleh Lyashko 5.7%, Ihor Smeshko 3.3%, and Oleksandr Vilkul and Yevhenii Muraiev 2.7% each.
• Over the past week, Anatoliy Hrytsenko and Yuliya Tymoshenko have strengthened their positions.
• Almost one quarter of respondents remain undecided about their candidate choice. Notably, the highest share of undecided voters is among the poorest respondents, those who usually vote most actively in elections, respondents of older and middle age, and more often among women in the Center and the West of the country.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy has the strongest electoral positions in the south-eastern regions. In Kyiv and the Center, he competes with Yuliya Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko. The latter has strong positions in Halychyna and the West. The leader of Batkivshchyna has strong positions in the central-western regions and in the North of the country. The highest level of support for Anatoliy Hrytsenko is recorded in Halychyna, and for Yuriy Boyko in the south-eastern regions, especially in Donbas.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the leader of sympathies among respondents who will be voting for the first time (almost every tenth voter of the candidate), as well as among those who do not often vote in elections. Meanwhile, among respondents who always vote, he shares first place with Tymoshenko and Poroshenko, while Hrytsenko and Boyko also have relatively stronger positions in this group.
• Twenty-two percent of respondents believe that Petro Poroshenko will become the next president. Twenty percent believe in the victory of Yuliya Tymoshenko, and 18% in the victory of Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy and Tymoshenko show positive dynamics on this indicator, while Poroshenko’s figures have slightly weakened over the past week.
• Half of respondents stated that their choice is guided by faith that the candidate they support can bring changes to the country. One third choose their favorite because the candidate has a real program for the country’s development, while one quarter cite belief that the candidate will lead the country in the right direction or has experience in public administration. One in five votes because the candidate opposes the existing system.
• The motive of expecting change and protesting against the system is most strongly emphasized among Zelenskyy’s supporters. In contrast, a development program, a strong team, and leadership qualities most inspire voters of Tymoshenko and Poroshenko. The latter’s voters also most often note that they choose their favorite due to experience in public administration; a similar motive is present among supporters of Tymoshenko, Hrytsenko, and Smeshko.
• Almost one in ten supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, and Zelenskyy choose their candidate because they believe the candidate has the highest chance of winning. At least one in ten supporters of Zelenskyy and Lyashko choose their candidate because the others are even worse. Personal sympathy for the candidate also motivates voters of Zelenskyy, Lyashko, and Muraiev.
• Almost three quarters of respondents believe that the main motive for voting for so-called “new faces” is the expectation of change in the country, while 18% are convinced that this phenomenon is driven by a desire for revenge against the so-called “old politicians” for what they have done to the country. This latter view finds relatively greater support among supporters of Petro Poroshenko, Anatoliy Hrytsenko, and Yuliya Tymoshenko.
• Interestingly, almost one in five respondents would like Sviatoslav Vakarchuk to have taken part in the presidential election. The highest share of such respondents is found among voters in Western Ukraine and Kyiv, as well as among supporters of Hrytsenko, Zelenskyy, and Poroshenko.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by Rating Group, almost 40% of Ukrainians would like to have their own business, while another 10% already own one. At the same time, half of respondents do not express such aspirations. Over the past six months, the share of those who do not want to start a business has slightly increased (in June 2018 it was 41%). A higher level of desire to open one’s own business is observed among younger and more affluent respondents. Within the group of well-off respondents, one quarter stated that they already run their own business.
• When assessing the role of the state in economic development, the majority of respondents (64%) primarily see it as ensuring income equality and social justice rather than establishing freedom of development and fair rules of competition. The latter approach is supported by 27%. Support for social equality has grown significantly over time, increasing from 48% in June of the previous year to 64% in February of the current year. State support for competition is more often favored by younger respondents, residents of the central and eastern regions, wealthier individuals, as well as those who want to have or already have their own business. At the same time, even among these groups, between 40% and 60% support the idea of social equality.
• Two thirds of respondents tend to believe that the state hinders the activity of small and medium-sized businesses in Ukraine. Only 7% think that public authorities contribute to the development of entrepreneurship, while 14% believe that the authorities currently do not interfere in business activities. Residents of the southern macro-region and respondents with lower incomes somewhat more often agree with the view that the state obstructs business activity in Ukraine.
• Fifty-seven percent of respondents believe that the simplified tax system should be preserved, as it stimulates business development. Only 19% support abolishing this system, arguing that it allows tax evasion. One quarter of respondents were unable to form an opinion on this issue. Support for the simplified taxation system is higher among entrepreneurs, residents of central regions, and wealthier respondents.
• An absolute majority of respondents (77%) support lowering bank lending rates for small businesses. Only 9% do not support this idea, while 14% were unable to answer. Those who already have or want to start their own business, middle-aged respondents, individuals with middle and low incomes, and residents of eastern regions are somewhat more inclined to support this initiative.
• Among different categories of business representatives, respondents express the highest level of trust in small (63%) and medium-sized (60%) entrepreneurs. Twenty-seven percent stated that they trust owners of large businesses, compared to 20% in September 2018. At the same time, trust in oligarchs remains very low at 8%. Trust in businesspeople, especially medium and large-scale ones, is noticeably higher among respondents with higher income levels. In contrast, trust in small entrepreneurs is equally high across all age and income groups.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by Rating Group in February 2019, two thirds of respondents believe that affairs in Ukraine are moving in the wrong direction, while every fifth respondent believes they are moving in the right direction (since the beginning of the year, the latter indicator has increased from 14% to 21%).
• Only 10% believe that Ukraine’s economic situation has improved over the past 12 months, while 60% have felt a deterioration. It is important to note that over the past five years this latter figure has decreased from 86% to 60%, while the share of respondents who believe that the situation has not changed has increased (from 11% to 27%).
• At the same time, respondents assess the dynamics of changes in their own household’s financial situation somewhat better than that of the country as a whole. Twelve percent of respondents reported an improvement in their family’s economic situation over the past 12 months, half reported a deterioration, and 36% did not feel any changes.
• Since the beginning of the year, voter mobilization has increased. Almost 85% of respondents (compared to 76% in December) stated that they definitely or rather intend to take part in the presidential elections in Ukraine. Relatively higher growth rates in willingness to vote were recorded in the South and East of the country.
• The leader of the presidential rating is Volodymyr Zelenskyi, supported by 25.1% of those who have decided and intend to vote. The second position is shared by Petro Poroshenko (16.6%) and Yuliia Tymoshenko (16.2%). Yurii Boiko is supported by 11.3%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 7.7%, Oleh Liashko by 5.6%, Andrii Sadovyi by 3%, Yevhenii Muraiev by 2.5%, and Ihor Smeshko by 2.5%. Oleksandr Shevchenko, Ruslan Koshulynskyi, and Oleksandr Vilkul each receive close to 2%.
• Over the past month, the ratings of Volodymyr Zelenskyi, Petro Poroshenko, and Yurii Boiko have increased. A slight decline has been observed in the level of support for Yuliia Tymoshenko. The electoral indicators of other candidates have not undergone significant changes. At the same time, over the past month the share of respondents who have not decided on their choice has increased noticeably (from 15% to 25%).
• Volodymyr Zelenskyi has relatively stronger electoral positions among voters in the South and East and is the leader of electoral ratings in Ukrainian cities. Petro Poroshenko leads in the West of the country. Yuliia Tymoshenko maintains her strongest positions in the Centre, where she shares first place with Volodymyr Zelenskyi.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyi and Yuliia Tymoshenko have the highest potential for electoral growth (the so-called “second choice”): 7% of voters are ready to support each of them if their preferred candidate does not take part in the elections. Petro Poroshenko and Anatolii Hrytsenko each have 4%.
• Twenty-four percent of respondents believe that the next president will be Petro Poroshenko. Nineteen percent believe in the victory of Yuliia Tymoshenko, and 17% in the victory of Volodymyr Zelenskyi. Over the past month, belief in Zelenskyi’s victory has increased significantly. Poroshenko’s indicators have also shown positive dynamics in this rating, while Tymoshenko’s indicators remain at the December level. At the same time, young people tend to believe in Zelenskyi’s victory, while older respondents tend to believe in the victory of Poroshenko and Tymoshenko.
• The anti-rating is led by Petro Poroshenko: almost half of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• Second-round modeling produced the following results: Yuliia Tymoshenko leads in a pair with Petro Poroshenko (31% versus 24%). At the same time, Volodymyr Zelenskyi wins both in a pair with Petro Poroshenko (42% versus 24%) and with Yuliia Tymoshenko (37% versus 24%).
• The party rating is led by the Servant of the People party, supported by 21.5% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Fatherland is supported by 18.7%, Petro Poroshenko Bloc “Solidarity” by 14.2%, Opposition Platform by 10.5%, Civic Position by 6.2%, and Self-Reliance by 5.5%. Around 4% support the Radical Party and Svoboda, around 3% support the Nashy party, and around 2% support the Opposition Bloc and UKROP.
• It is noteworthy that Volodymyr Zelenskyi and Petro Poroshenko have significantly stronger personal electoral support than their respective parties, Servant of the People and Petro Poroshenko Bloc. A similar pattern is observed for Anatolii Hrytsenko and Oleh Liashko. In contrast, Yuliia Tymoshenko and Andrii Sadovyi have personal ratings that are lower than the ratings of their parties, Fatherland and Self-Reliance.

• According to the results of a study conducted by Rating Group, 67% of Ukrainians stated that they have a permanent sexual partner. Another 4% have a non-permanent partner. Nineteen percent said that they currently do not have a partner but had sexual partners previously. Only 3% stated that they do not have a partner and have never had one before, while 7% refused to answer the question.
• Almost 80% of respondents agreed with the statement that sex is a very important part of a person’s life (10% disagreed). Those who are in registered or unregistered marriages were more inclined to support this statement.
• Two thirds believe that sexual relations before marriage are normal, while every fifth respondent holds the opposite view. This position was more often supported by younger respondents and those who are in unregistered relationships or are unmarried.
• Forty-five percent believe that sex is more important for men than for women, while 34% hold the opposite view. Supporters of this opinion are more common among women and among respondents of middle and older age.
• Forty-one percent agreed with the statement that fulfilling the “marital duty in bed” is obligatory for a man, while nearly the same share disagreed. Support for this view is somewhat higher among men.
• Thirty percent of respondents agree with the statement that sex can be a service that is sold for money, while 55% disagree. Men and respondents of younger and middle age agree with this statement more often.
• Twenty-four percent agree with the opinion that a woman should not show sexual initiative, while 57% disagree. Among those who support this view there are relatively more men, younger respondents, and those in unregistered marriages.
• Only 19% agree that a woman who is married is obliged to have sex with her husband even if she does not want to, while 67% disagree. Support for this statement is somewhat higher among the oldest respondents.
• Only 16% agreed with the opinion that it is normal to have permanent sexual relations with more than one person at the same time, while 70% disagreed. There are somewhat more opponents of this view among women and younger respondents.
• Sixty percent of respondents do not feel discomfort or shame when talking about sex with their husband, wife, or permanent sexual partner. Only 6% feel very ashamed. Thirty-five percent do not feel any shame when talking about sex with friends or acquaintances, while 14% feel very ashamed. Twenty-one percent stated that they do not feel shame when talking about sex with strangers, although almost one third feel very ashamed. Younger respondents and men feel less discomfort when talking about sex.
• Half of respondents plan to celebrate Valentine’s Day. At the same time, 41% do not plan to celebrate it, and 3% do not know this holiday. The highest share of those who plan to celebrate is in the South (59%), while in other regions it is about half. Men, younger respondents, and unregistered couples are more likely to plan celebrations.
• For 40% of respondents, Valentine’s Day is a day of all lovers. Twenty-seven percent said it is an ordinary day, for 19% it is an occasion to congratulate close people. Only 8% consider it a holiday that is not understandable within the traditions and culture of Ukraine. Supporters of this holiday are more common in the southern macro-region, among youth, men, and those in unregistered marital relationships. For one third of older respondents, this holiday is just an ordinary day.
• Almost half of respondents plan to give gifts on Valentine’s Day, while 45% do not have such intentions. In the South, East, and Centre, about half of respondents plan to give gifts, while in the West this share is 43%. Higher intentions are observed among men, younger respondents, and unregistered couples.

24 Channel issued an apology to Rating Group for the erroneous publication of inaccurate information.

The Editor-in-Chief of 24 Channel, Olena Trybushna, sent an explanatory letter to the Director of Rating Group, Oleksii Antypovych, with the following content:

“Regarding the publication on the website 24tv.ua of materials about allegedly manipulative ratings, a technical error and a misunderstanding occurred in the editorial office. The materials ‘Why the ratings of presidential candidates differ significantly’ and ‘How politicians’ ratings in Ukraine changed after the elections: infographic’ were not aired on Channel 24 precisely because the journalist incorrectly раскрыв the topic and presented the facts inaccurately. I personally prohibited the story from being broadcast.

However, the website’s content managers were not aware that the material had been rejected and had not gone on air, and therefore published it on the website. The television channel’s editorial team learned about this only after your publication and, having clarified the situation, asked the website to remove the materials. I apologize for this misunderstanding.”

‍

You can find the text of the publication here (in Ukrainian): https://24tv.ua/poyasnennya_shhodo_publikatsiyi_nedostovirnoyi_informatsiyi_n1107659

‍

On February 3, 2019, Channel 24 published a piece titled “Why the ratings of presidential candidates differ significantly: an explanation”. Instead of an analysis of trends, the piece demonstrates the art of manipulation by certain journalists using sociological data. Given the content and tone of the story, one may assume that its purpose is to discredit sociology in general and specific sociological organizations in particular. We also sincerely hope that this story does not reflect the editorial policy of Channel 24 and represents only the opinion of individual journalists. Why do we believe this?

Fact one.
The article accompanying the story states that “the Director of the Democratic Initiatives Foundation claims that so many different surveys are published so that people do not see an objective picture.” In reality, these are not her words — she was reading out a message (a post) written by a journalist. The authors of the story repeatedly use quotes by Iryna Bekeshkina and Oleksii Antypovych from the round table “Sociology and Elections: an argument for a rational choice or manipulation?”, taking them out of one context and placing them into a completely different one.
Conclusion: manipulation.

‍

Fact two.

A quote from the story states that, having compared the ratings of two sociological groups, journalists noted that during the 2014 presidential election Petro Poroshenko was given quite different percentages before the first round. According to the Democratic Initiatives Foundation and the Razumkov Centre, he was given around 45%, while the Rating Group gave 34%. The authors claim that a ten-percent difference is substantial and exceeds statistical error, and further compare these figures with the actual election result, where Poroshenko received nearly 56%.

Conclusion: manipulation. The authors compare indicators that are not comparable and on this basis construct manipulative conclusions.

First, they compare the Democratic Initiatives figure of 45% among those who intended to vote with the Rating Group figure of 34% among all respondents, concluding that the difference is significant. In reality, among all respondents the figures were 35% and 34% respectively — meaning that the difference is фактично absent.

Second, they compare these figures with the actual election result. However, in the 2014 presidential election there were 29.6 million registered voters, about 18 million participated, and 9.9 million voted for Petro Poroshenko. This equals 54.7% of those who voted, but only 33.4% of all registered voters. Thus, the Rating Group not only did not miscalculate its forecast, but predicted the result quite accurately: 34% among all respondents versus the actual 33.4%.

For correct comparison between survey results and election outcomes, the Rating Group specifically calculated and published the indicator “percentage among those who intend to vote and have decided on their choice.” This indicator was available in May 2014, yet the journalists did not refer to it at all.

We could assume that the authors simply confused different indicators (among all respondents, among those who intend to vote, among those who have decided). However, similar theses had already appeared on social media, promoted by certain commentators, such as claims that “your May 2014 rating gave Poroshenko 34%, but he received 55%,” or that “sociological surveys convincingly prove that the Ukrainian people are twice as smart as sociologists think.”

‍

Fact three.
Another quote from the story claims that different sociological organizations give different outcomes for a hypothetical second round between Petro Poroshenko and Yurii Boiko, and presents a graphic titled “Ratings of sociological centers regarding the second round of the 2019 presidential election.”

Conclusion: manipulation. The authors compare data obtained at different times and construct conclusions on this basis. For example, the most recent data published by the Rating Group in January 2019 show that in a second round Poroshenko would receive 23% and Boiko 21% among all respondents. Meanwhile, the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology had not published any second-round data in 2019 at all.

We therefore consider such actions by the journalists — namely, the authors of this Channel 24 story — to be unprofessional from a journalistic standpoint, but quite professional from the standpoint of manipulation.

On February 4, Channel 24’s website published another analytical piece, “How politicians’ ratings in Ukraine changed after the elections: infographic”, which was based exclusively on data from the Rating Group. We have never prohibited journalists from using our data; on the contrary, we welcome genuine analysis. This article itself demonstrates that Channel 24 journalists understand that election results can only be compared with candidate ratings among respondents who have decided on their choice. This is exactly how the infographic was constructed. However, in the earlier story “Why the ratings of presidential candidates differ significantly: an explanation”, the authors compared election results with ratings among all respondents.

Even in this infographic, however, a number of errors were made. For example, figures for November 2016 are given among all respondents (and even then correctly only for Tymoshenko and Poroshenko), while figures for other months are given among those who have decided, and then presented as a single “dynamic.” In such cases, we recommend using a single primary source — the website of the Rating Group — where candidate dynamics are calculated using a unified methodology, ensuring correct comparison. There is also always the option to contact the Rating Group directly for clarification from the primary source.

Therefore, the Rating Group demands that Channel 24 remove the mentioned materials and issue an official retraction of the manipulations disseminated in the story “Why the ratings of presidential candidates differ significantly: an explanation.”

Otherwise, Rating Group will cease any cooperation with Channel 24.

• According to the results of a sociological survey conducted jointly by the Social Monitoring Center, the O. Yaremenko Ukrainian Institute for Social Research, the company Info Sapiens, and the Sociological Group Rating, 73% of Ukrainians believe that the country is moving in the wrong direction. Only 15% consider the direction of the country’s development to be correct, while another 12% were unable to answer this question. The highest levels of pessimism regarding the country’s trajectory were expressed by residents of the south-eastern regions and Donbas, while relatively fewer negative assessments were recorded in Galicia. The most positive evaluations were expressed by voters of Petro Poroshenko, whereas negative assessments prevail among supporters of other candidates.
• Negative perceptions also dominate assessments of development at the local level. Thus, 64% of respondents consider the direction of development of their oblast to be wrong, while only 20% see it as correct. In addition, 58% negatively assess the situation in their place of residence, compared to 28% who view it positively.
• According to the majority of respondents (67%), peace is what Ukraine lacks most today; over the past six months this figure has increased from 62% to 67%. Forty percent believe the country lacks stability most, 37% point to a lack of order, 34% to prosperity, and 31% to development, while 28–30% mention unity and justice. The issue of peace is somewhat more relevant for the West, the South, and Donbas; stability is more salient for the capital region and the south-eastern oblasts; development is more often emphasized in the Center, North, South, and East; and unity is more frequently mentioned in Galicia and Donbas. Issues of order, justice, and prosperity are perceived as similarly relevant across nearly all macro-regions.
• Eighty-one percent of respondents expressed readiness to participate in the presidential election, including 45% who are definitely ready and 36% who are rather ready to vote.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyi leads the presidential ratings, with 21.9% support among respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Yuliia Tymoshenko is supported by 19.2% of such respondents, Petro Poroshenko by 14.8%, Yurii Boiko by 10.4%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 8.4%, Oleh Liashko by 6.5%, Yevhenii Muraiev by 3.4%, Andrii Sadovyi by 2.4%, and Oleksandr Shevchenko by 2.2%. Support for other candidates is below 2%.
• At the same time, nearly one in five voters believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will become the next president (22.1%). Confidence in Petro Poroshenko’s victory is expressed by 16.6% of those intending to vote, in Volodymyr Zelenskyi’s victory by 11.1%, and in Yurii Boiko’s by 4.1%. Fewer than 3% believe that other politicians could assume the highest state office.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating of politicians: half of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances. Nearly 30% would not vote for Yuliia Tymoshenko, about one quarter for Yurii Boiko and Arsenii Yatseniuk, and one in five for Oleh Liashko.
• Six political forces have significant chances of entering parliament. Batkivshchyna remains the leader of the party rating, supported by 21.2% of respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Support for the party Servant of the People stands at 19.0%, Petro Poroshenko Bloc “Solidarity” at 13.0%, the Opposition Platform “For Life” at 10.5%, Civic Position at 8.6%, and the Radical Party at 6.5%. Samopomich (3.8%) and Yevhenii Muraiev’s party Nashy (3.3%) also retain certain chances of crossing the electoral threshold, while support for other political forces is below 3%.
• More than one third of respondents expect that after the presidential election there will be an improvement in optimism, confidence in the future, and in the political and economic situation in the country. At the same time, between 33% and 39% do not expect any changes in these areas.
• Improvements in their family’s material situation after the election are expected by 28% of respondents, while 40% have no expectations of change in this regard. Improvements in work, career, or education are expected by 22%, whereas 50% do not expect such changes. Importantly, positive expectations across all areas have increased over the past month. Optimistic expectations are most often expressed by voters of Petro Poroshenko, Yuliia Tymoshenko, and Volodymyr Zelenskyi.
• Mass emigration abroad (55%), economic decline (52%), and impoverishment of the population (47%) are seen by respondents as the most acute threats facing Ukraine today.
• Between 30% and 39% of respondents cite currency devaluation, a full-scale war with Russia, deterioration of the nation’s health, state collapse, rising crime, and population decline as significant threats. Around one quarter consider population degradation, a lack of governance, and environmental disasters to be relevant threats. Possible mass unrest, famine, and the establishment of a dictatorship are mentioned by roughly one in six or seven respondents. Economic decline is more often perceived as a threat in the South and East; a full-scale war with Russia in Galicia, the West, and the Center; and inflation in the capital region, the Center, the North, and Donbas. Notably, the threat of impoverishment is more frequently mentioned by voters of Yurii Boiko, Oleksandr Vilkul, and Yevhenii Muraiev, while the threat of war with Russia is more often cited by supporters of Anatolii Hrytsenko, Ruslan Koshulynskyi, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, Petro Poroshenko, and Andrii Sadovyi.
• More than half of respondents expressed unwillingness to participate in protest actions to defend their rights and interests, while 37% stated they would be ready to protest if necessary. Over the past few months, the level of protest sentiment has declined (in November, 52% expressed readiness to protest). The highest level of protest readiness is recorded in Galicia, and the lowest in Donbas.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by the Rating Group in January 2019, almost 70% of respondents believe that the country needs radical changes. Only 12% are convinced that everything should remain as it is today, while 14% advocate a return to the past. The demand for radical change is relatively high (around 70%) in most regions. A comparatively lower demand for change is observed in the East (62%) and Donbas (52%). In the latter macro-region, one quarter of respondents express nostalgia for the past, and one in five do not want changes because they expect them to lead to deterioration.
• Over the past year, voter mobilization has increased. Forty-four percent of respondents stated that they definitely intend to participate in the presidential election of Ukraine, while another 35% said they are rather likely to do so. At the same time, the share of those who believe that their vote does not matter in elections has decreased (from 47% to 40%).
• The leaders of the presidential rating are Volodymyr Zelenskyi, supported by 19.0% of respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote, and Yuliia Tymoshenko, supported by 18.2% of such respondents. Petro Poroshenko is supported by 15.1%, Yurii Boiko by 10.0%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 8.5%, Oleh Liashko by 7.0%, Yevhenii Muraiev by 3.6%, Oleksandr Shevchenko by 2.9%, Andrii Sadovyi by 2.7%, and Oleksandr Vilkul by 2.6%.
• Over the past month, the ratings of Volodymyr Zelenskyi and Petro Poroshenko have increased noticeably. A slight decline has been recorded in the level of support for Yuliia Tymoshenko. The electoral indicators of other candidates have not changed significantly.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyi demonstrates relatively higher electoral support among voters in the South and East; in Kyiv he shares the lead with Petro Poroshenko, while in Donbas he shares it with Yurii Boiko. Yuliia Tymoshenko leads in the Center and in the North, and in the West she shares the leading position with the incumbent Head of State. The latter is the leader of voter sympathies in Galicia.
• Volodymyr Zelenskyi is the candidate with the highest potential for electoral growth (the so-called “second choice”). He could be supported by an additional 7.4% of voters if their current favorites did not participate in the elections. Yuliia Tymoshenko and Anatolii Hrytsenko could each gain an additional 6%, Yurii Boiko and Oleh Liashko 5% each, Yevhenii Muraiev, Andrii Sadovyi, and Oleksandr Shevchenko 4% each, Oleksandr Vilkul 3%, and Petro Poroshenko and Valentyn Nalyvaichenko 2% each.
• Twenty-three percent of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will become the next president. Confidence in Petro Poroshenko’s victory is expressed by 16.3%, and in Volodymyr Zelenskyi’s by 10.3%. Recently, belief in Zelenskyi’s victory has increased significantly. Positive dynamics in this rating are also observed for Tymoshenko and Poroshenko. Belief in Tymoshenko’s victory prevails in almost all macro-regions except Galicia and Kyiv, where respondents are more convinced that the next president will be Petro Poroshenko.
• Petro Poroshenko continues to lead the anti-rating: almost half of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances. Thirty-one percent said they would not vote for Yuliia Tymoshenko, one quarter for Yurii Boiko, and one in five for Arsenii Yatseniuk and Oleh Liashko.
• Second-round modeling produced the following results. Yuliia Tymoshenko leads in pairings with Petro Poroshenko (27% versus 18%) and Yurii Boiko (28% versus 18%), but slightly loses in a pairing with Volodymyr Zelenskyi (29% versus 24%). Volodymyr Zelenskyi also wins in pairings with Petro Poroshenko (34% versus 20%) and Yurii Boiko (33% versus 17%). In the Yurii Boiko–Petro Poroshenko pairing, the incumbent president leads by a small margin (23% versus 21%). Importantly, in these hypothetical pairings more than one third of respondents state they would not participate in the vote, while 16–19% remain undecided.
• Sixty-seven percent of respondents state that Ukraine needs a leader capable of uniting, reconciling, and calming society, while 24% prefer a leader inclined toward dictatorship and strict enforcement of order. The latter expectations are relatively more common among voters of Oleh Liashko and Yurii Boiko.
• Forty-three percent continue to see the country’s leader as a politician with experience in governing the state, while 45% believe the president should be a new figure, even without experience in public administration. The demand for renewal of power is strongest among voters of Volodymyr Zelenskyi, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk, Ruslan Koshulynskyi, Oleksandr Shevchenko, and Yevhenii Muraiev. In contrast, voters of Yuliia Tymoshenko, Petro Poroshenko, and Yurii Boiko primarily vote for experience.
• Forty-seven percent assert that new people without negative experience in senior positions, untainted by corruption and abuses, should work in government. On the other hand, 43% believe that experienced professionals should occupy senior state positions. As in the previous question, the demand for experience prevails among voters of Poroshenko, Tymoshenko, and Boiko, while the opposite view is supported by voters of “new” politicians.
• Satisfaction with the performance of the incumbent Head of State has increased slightly in recent months, while assessments of the work of the Prime Minister and Parliament have declined. Fifteen percent are satisfied with the performance of President Petro Poroshenko, while 80% are dissatisfied. Twelve percent are satisfied with the work of Prime Minister Volodymyr Hroisman, while 81% are dissatisfied. Only 5% are satisfied with the work of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, while 90% are dissatisfied.
• The number of respondents who place the greatest responsibility for solving the country’s problems on the President has increased: in September 2017 this figure was 49%, now it is 57%. Sixteen percent consider the Prime Minister responsible for the situation in the country, and the same share name the Verkhovna Rada. Responsibility is relatively more often attributed to Parliament by voters of Petro Poroshenko.
• Almost half of respondents believe that oligarchs (48%) and the President (45%) most hinder positive changes in the country. Over the year, the latter indicator has increased from 40% to 45%. One third are convinced that the Cabinet of Ministers is to blame for the slow pace of change (also increasing from 29% to 32%), 22% think so of the parliamentary coalition (down from 29% to 22%), 18% blame Russia, 16% the parliamentary opposition, and 12% the International Monetary Fund.
• Seventy-one percent of respondents believe that state power in the country is currently weak, while 17% hold the opposite view. The latter are most numerous in Galicia and among voters of Petro Poroshenko. Notably, over the past 3.5 years the indicator of perceived “strength” of power has increased by only 4 percentage points (from 13% to 17%).
• Half of respondents believe that the current authorities most lack honesty. One third point to a lack of efficiency, humanity, or public support; one quarter to professionalism and competence; and 13–15% to authority and managerial experience. Over the past 3.5 years, the demand for humanity and public support from the authorities has increased, while the demand for efficiency and professionalism has somewhat decreased.
• Respondents rated progress relatively better in the reform of the Armed Forces, the Ukrainization of the information space, and police reform. The lowest assessments concern anti-corruption and judicial reforms, changes to electoral legislation, de-oligarchization, the abolition of parliamentary immunity, and the adoption of legislation on presidential impeachment. Compared with the previous year, assessments improved regarding Armed Forces reform, Ukrainization, decentralization, education reform, healthcare reform, the fight against corruption, and judicial reform, while assessments of pension reform deteriorated.
• Responsibility for implementing most reforms is most often attributed either to the Government or to Parliament. Exceptions are Armed Forces reform, de-oligarchization, and anti-corruption reforms, where respondents more often consider the Head of State responsible.
• Since October 2018, support for granting the Tomos on autocephaly to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine has increased to 51%. Twenty-one percent do not support this initiative, while 20% are indifferent. The lowest level of support is recorded among residents of the South, East, and Donbas; in these macro-regions, one third to one quarter of respondents are indifferent to this issue.
• The number of those who consider it important to live in a democratic state has gradually increased: today 40% unequivocally support this statement. No more than 10% consider it unimportant. Demand for democratic values is highest among residents of the capital and in Galicia, and lowest in Donbas.
• Almost 70% of respondents support introducing a mechanism for making state decisions through a nationwide referendum. Forty-seven percent believe voting should be conducted only through personal attendance at polling stations, while 10% support electronic voting via mobile communication or the internet, and one third support combined voting methods. Electronic voting is more popular among younger age groups.
• Sixty-four percent support the thesis that the Ukrainian language should be the sole state language; 15% favor granting the Russian language official status in certain regions; and 15% support state-level bilingualism. Support for granting any status to the Russian language is highest among residents of the South, East, and Donbas.
• Almost 60% support diplomatic ways of resolving the war in Donbas (37% favor ending hostilities and freezing the conflict, and 22% favor granting these territories autonomous or federal status within Ukraine). Only 7% support full separation of the occupied territories. At the same time, 18% support continuing military actions until full restoration of Ukrainian authority throughout Donbas. Support for this latter view is relatively higher among residents of western regions and the capital, and among voters of Ruslan Koshulynskyi and Petro Poroshenko. Meanwhile, 68% of respondents continue to consider Russia an aggressor country toward Ukraine, while 20% hold the opposite view. The largest share of respondents supporting the latter view is found in Donbas.
• Support for a pro-Western vector continues to prevail in Ukraine: 46% support accession to NATO (32% are opposed), and 50% support accession to the EU (30% favor equidistance from Russia and the West, and 9% support joining the Customs Union). Supporters of a pro-Western path dominate in all regions except the south-eastern oblasts and Donbas.

 The survey was conducted by Rating Group Ukraine on order of the International Republican Institute.  

Data was collected throughout Ukraine (except for the occupied territories of Crimea and part of the Donbas) from December 13-27, 2018. The sample consisted of 2,400 residents of Ukraine aged 18 and olderand eligible to vote.The sample is representative by gender, age, region, and settlement size.

The margin of error does not exceed 2,0%. Average response rate was 62.7%.

English version of the report can be downloaded from the IRI.

• Within the framework of the “PORTRAITS OF REGIONS” project, Rating Group conducted a survey of Ukrainian citizens aged 18 and over in all oblasts of Ukraine and in the city of Kyiv (excluding the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea) from 16 November to 10 December 2018. In total, 40,000 respondents were interviewed using face-to-face interviews, with 1,600 respondents in each oblast. The sample is representative by type of settlement and by the age and gender structure of each oblast. The margin of error at the level of each individual oblast does not exceed 2.4%, and at the national level does not exceed 0.5%.
• The analysis of the survey results shows that residents assess the overall situation in the country significantly worse than the situation at the local level. Only 6% assessed the political situation in the country as calm, whereas 27% consider the situation in their oblast calm and 43% in their city or village. Nearly 58% of respondents describe the situation in the country as tense and 31% as critical. At the local level, assessments are somewhat more positive: from 38% to 49% describe the situation as tense, and only 13–15% as critical.
• Across regions, there is no substantial difference in assessments of the political situation nationwide. The highest share of those who consider it critical is observed in most south-eastern regions as well as in Khmelnytskyi oblast. At the same time, assessments at the local level vary considerably by region. Relatively more respondents who view the political situation in their oblast as calm live in Ternopil and Lviv oblasts, while the fewest are in Luhansk, Donetsk, and Kherson oblasts. Regarding the political situation in the place of residence, the highest share of calm assessments is found in Lviv and Ternopil oblasts, and the lowest in Kyiv, Kherson oblast, and Donbas.
• Respondents assess the direction of the country’s development worse than that of their oblast or their city or village. Only 14% believe the country is moving in the right direction, compared to 21% regarding their oblast and 29% regarding their settlement. Accordingly, 74% say the country is moving in the wrong direction, while this view is shared by 62% with regard to their oblast and by 55% with regard to their place of residence. The smallest share of those who believe the country is moving in the right direction is found in Odesa, Luhansk, Kherson, and Khmelnytskyi oblasts. At the oblast level, residents of Lviv and Kharkiv oblasts more often consider the direction of regional development correct, while this opinion is least common in Donbas and the South. As for the place of residence, the most positive assessments are recorded in Lviv, Khmelnytskyi, Kharkiv, and Ternopil oblasts, and the most negative in Luhansk, Mykolaiv, and Kherson oblasts.
• Despite the generally negative assessments of the current situation, expectations among residents of Ukraine tend to be neutral or moderately positive. Between 16% and 18% express optimistic expectations for the future, both nationwide and locally. More than half believe the situation will remain unchanged, while between 17% and 20% expect deterioration in the coming year.
• The military conflict in eastern Ukraine and bribery and corruption in government are identified as the main nationwide problems. At the personal level, respondents are more concerned about rising utility tariffs, low wages and pensions, and inflation.
• In the presidential race, Yulia Tymoshenko leads the ratings, supported by 20.8% of respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. She is followed by Volodymyr Zelenskyi with 13.4%, Petro Poroshenko with 11.1%, Yurii Boiko with 9.6%, Anatolii Hrytsenko with 7.8%, Oleh Liashko with 6.6%, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk with 4.6%, Yevhenii Muraiev with 4.5%, and Oleksandr Shevchenko with 4.2%. Support for other candidates does not exceed 3%. At the same time, nearly one third of respondents have not yet decided on a candidate or do not intend to vote in the elections.
• Yulia Tymoshenko leads in almost all oblasts of Ukraine, with the exception of Donetsk, Luhansk, and Kharkiv oblasts, where Yurii Boiko occupies the first position. In Lviv oblast, she shares the lead with Petro Poroshenko and Anatolii Hrytsenko; in Ivano-Frankivsk oblast with Oleksandr Shevchenko; and in Mykolaiv oblast with Volodymyr Zelenskyi.
• In the annual dynamics, a gradual increase in Yulia Tymoshenko’s rating has been observed since February of the reporting year. With his appearance in electoral ratings, Volodymyr Zelenskyi’s support also increased. The ratings of Petro Poroshenko, Yurii Boiko, and Oleh Liashko remained largely unchanged. Support for Anatolii Hrytsenko and Sviatoslav Vakarchuk declined, while Volodymyr Rabinovych experienced significant losses. At the same time, support for Andrii Sadovyi and Yevhenii Muraiev remained stable.
• Twenty-one percent of respondents believe that Yulia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election, and over the past year the share of those confident in her victory has doubled. Confidence in Petro Poroshenko’s victory stands at 12.8%, which is slightly lower than the previous year. About 5% expect Volodymyr Zelenskyi to win, 3.5% Yurii Boiko, 2.2% Oleh Liashko, and 2.1% Anatolii Hrytsenko. Fewer than 2% believe in the victory of other candidates. Yulia Tymoshenko leads in this indicator in all oblasts except Lviv oblast, where more respondents believe Petro Poroshenko will win. Confidence in their preferred candidate is most pronounced among supporters of Yulia Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the negative rating. Among respondents who intend to vote, 50.3% state that they would not vote for him under any circumstances. He holds the first position in the negative rating in all regions except Lviv oblast, where Yurii Boiko ranks first.
• Modeling of the second round of the presidential election among all respondents shows that Yulia Tymoshenko convincingly defeats Petro Poroshenko and Yurii Boiko, and also has an advantage over Anatolii Hrytsenko, while her positions against Volodymyr Zelenskyi are nearly equal. Among those who intend to vote in the first round, Yulia Tymoshenko also leads in pairings with Petro Poroshenko and Yurii Boiko, has an advantage over Anatolii Hrytsenko, and a slight lead over Volodymyr Zelenskyi.
• At the regional level, Yulia Tymoshenko leads Petro Poroshenko in the second round in all regions without exception. In a pairing with Yurii Boiko, she loses in Donbas and Kharkiv oblast. In a pairing with Anatolii Hrytsenko, she loses in Lviv, Ternopil, Khmelnytskyi, and Cherkasy oblasts. Volodymyr Zelenskyi outperforms Yulia Tymoshenko in most regions of the East and South, while losing to her in most oblasts of Western and Central Ukraine.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna leads with 21.7% among respondents who have decided on their party choice and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 12.4%, BPP Solidarity by 9.6%, the Opposition Bloc by 9.5%, Civic Position by 7.8%, the Radical Party by 6.5%, UKROP by 4.6%, the party “Nashi” by 4.2%, and Samopomich by 4.0%. Support for other parties does not exceed 4%. More than one third of respondents have not decided on a party choice or do not intend to vote.
• Batkivshchyna leads in all oblasts except Donbas and Kharkiv oblast, where the Opposition Bloc ranks first. Over the year, support has increased for Batkivshchyna, “Servant of the People,” and UKROP. BPP Solidarity has slightly recovered its positions, while the ratings of the Opposition Bloc, Civic Position, and the Radical Party remained almost unchanged. Support for the parties “Za Zhyttia” and Samopomich declined.
• Orientation toward closer cooperation with the European Union and a candidate’s socio-economic program are the most influential motives in presidential choice. About half of respondents also consider personal leadership qualities, focus on solving nationwide problems, political experience, and the ability to ensure stability. For a significant share, the ability to bring about change, belonging to a new generation of politicians, focus on regional issues, and the presence of a strong team are also important. Orientation toward closer cooperation with Russia is significant only for a minority of respondents and is more relevant in most south-eastern regions.
• Thirty-one percent of respondents expect that the situation in Ukraine will improve as a result of the upcoming presidential elections. Thirty-five percent believe the situation will not change, and only 15% expect deterioration. Positive expectations are most common among supporters of Yulia Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko, and least common among those who do not intend to vote or have not decided. The most optimistic expectations are recorded in Kirovohrad, Ternopil, Rivne, Volyn, Vinnytsia, Cherkasy, Chernivtsi, and Khmelnytskyi oblasts.
• Respondents believe that the likelihood of election fraud is higher at the national level than at the oblast or local level. About one third allow for minor fraud at all levels. Expectations of significant violations are highest in Dnipropetrovsk oblast, while regional-level fraud is more often expected in Vinnytsia and Odesa oblasts.
• A minority of respondents express a positive or neutral attitude toward material assistance from politicians during elections, while the majority oppose this practice. More tolerant attitudes are observed in Kirovohrad, Khmelnytskyi, Chernihiv, and Odesa oblasts, and the least tolerant in Ternopil oblast.
• The activities of central authorities are evaluated worse than those of local authorities. Satisfaction with the work of the Prime Minister, the President, and the Verkhovna Rada remains very low, while satisfaction with local heads is higher. Among oblast state administrations, relatively better evaluations are recorded for Kharkiv and Lviv, and the worst for Mykolaiv, Kherson, and Luhansk. Local heads receive the highest satisfaction ratings in Khmelnytskyi, Kharkiv, Lviv, and Odesa oblasts, and the lowest in Kherson oblast.
• Respondents more often perceive an increase in corruption at the national level than at the oblast or local level. Many believe the situation has not changed, while only a small share report a decrease in corruption. The worst assessments are recorded in Dnipropetrovsk, Luhansk, Odesa, Vinnytsia, Cherkasy, and Lviv oblasts, as well as in Kyiv.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the situation in most public services and sectors. Relatively better assessments are given to school education, road conditions, and personal safety, while healthcare, social protection, youth support, industrial development, and anti-corruption efforts receive the lowest evaluations. Over the year, satisfaction with road conditions increased in most regions, while assessments of school education and local anti-corruption efforts worsened.
• Opportunities for leisure and recreation are evaluated most positively, while opportunities for achieving success and running one’s own business are assessed most negatively. Economic development potential over the next 5–10 years is perceived as low by a significant share of respondents, with only a small minority seeing high potential. Zakarpattia receives the most positive evaluations, while Cherkasy, Chernihiv, Mykolaiv, Kherson, and Luhansk oblasts receive the most negative.
• Most respondents report feeling proud to be citizens of Ukraine, and even more feel proud of their oblast and their city or village. However, a substantial share of residents in several eastern and southern regions do not share this sense of pride. Nature and history are most often cited as sources of pride in one’s region, followed by traditions, culture, local residents, landmarks, and resources.
• Approximately 70% of respondents consider themselves happy, while about one fifth do not. Happiness is reported more often in western regions and less often in Sumy and Mykolaiv oblasts. One third express a desire to start their own business, while about half do not share this aspiration. Migration intentions have increased compared to the previous year, especially in western regions, although many of those planning to work abroad intend to invest their earnings in Ukraine.
• Most respondents support Ukrainian as the sole state language, while support for granting Russian any official status is higher in south-eastern regions. A majority consider Russia to be an aggressor toward Ukraine, although this view is less common in several eastern and southern oblasts. Support for EU and NATO integration prevails nationwide, with the pro-Western orientation strongest in the West and weakest in Odesa oblast and Donbas.

• According to the results of a survey conducted by the Rating Group at least two thirds of respondents (64%) are dissatisfied with state medical services over the past five years. At the same time, 23% report being satisfied with state healthcare services. Over the past year, no significant changes have occurred in the assessments of public healthcare. Overall, the level of satisfaction with public medical services is somewhat higher among those who visit doctors more frequently.
• Only 15% of respondents believe that over the past two years the overall quality of state medical services in the region has improved, while 14% noted an improvement in the quality of medical services they personally received. Compared to the previous year, the share of respondents who did not observe any changes at all increased (from 41% to 47%). At the same time, on a personal level, respondents more often reported a deterioration in assessments of state medical services (from 26% to 32%). Urban residents are more inclined to notice positive changes compared to rural residents. The frequency of visits to doctors also affects evaluations of services: the more often respondents seek medical care, the better they assess the work of healthcare professionals.
• Over the year, there has been a slight decrease in the share of respondents who positively assess the work of state medical institutions. Currently, 38% of respondents assess the quality of services positively, while 46% assess it negatively. Rural residents, those who visit doctors more frequently, and respondents with children under the age of 18 give higher evaluations of the work of these institutions.
• At the same time, nearly half of respondents were unable to assess the quality of medical care in private healthcare facilities at all. Forty percent assess it positively, while 13% assess it negatively. Younger respondents, more affluent individuals, urban residents, and those who visit doctors more frequently are more inclined to evaluate private healthcare positively.
• Forty-six percent of respondents stated that they had witnessed reconstruction or renovation of hospitals over the past two years, while 32% reported the opposite. Compared to the previous year, the share of those who noticed positive changes increased from 35% to 46%. Urban residents and those who visited doctors more frequently were significantly more likely to mention renovations of hospital premises.
• Over the past year, one quarter of respondents reported changes in the quality of medical services received, while 45% stated that the quality had not changed. When assessing various quality criteria of medical services, 44% reported improvements in the conditions under which medical care is provided, 38% said conditions had not changed, and 12% indicated deterioration. Attitudes toward patients, professionalism and competence of doctors, and effectiveness of treatment improved in the opinion of 34–39% of respondents, while 43–44% believe these criteria have not changed and 15–17% reported deterioration.
• Half of respondents noticed changes in the cost of medical services, while 21% believe costs have not changed. According to the evaluation of specific criteria, more than 70% believe that the cost of medical services involving specialized equipment and consultations has worsened. Almost 90% reported a deterioration in prices for medications prescribed by doctors.
• For 11% of respondents, territorial and time accessibility to medical institutions has changed, while 65% did not notice such changes. Urban residents and those who visit doctors more frequently were more likely to report changes. More than half of respondents noticed improvements in the ability to choose a doctor, while 27% indicated no changes and 13% noted deterioration. Nearly 40% positively assessed changes in the territorial convenience of medical facilities, one third noticed no changes, and one quarter believe accessibility has worsened. At the same time, more than 40% did not notice changes in the possibility of scheduling appointments in advance, waiting times, or doctors’ working schedules. Nearly one third positively assessed these changes, while 14–18% assessed them negatively.
• Only 6% of respondents are well informed about the changes proposed by the healthcare reform. Forty-two percent stated that they had heard something about it, 29% know very little, and 21% know nothing about the essence of the reform. Awareness is higher among urban residents and individuals with higher education.
• Thirty-five percent of respondents stated that they support the implementation of healthcare reform in Ukraine, while 43% expressed the opposite opinion. Twenty-two percent were unable to provide any assessment. Support for the reform is higher among young people, rural residents, and those who are aware of its implementation.
• At the same time, only 17% are confident that the healthcare system will improve as a result of the reform over the next two years. Twenty-eight percent believe the situation will worsen, while 38% believe it will remain unchanged. Compared to the previous year, the number of those who optimistically assess short-term prospects has decreased. Respondents aged 50 and older are the most pessimistic. In the long-term perspective (5–10 years), respondents assess the situation more optimistically: 52% believe it will improve, 13% believe it will worsen, 14% believe it will not change, and 20% were unable to answer. As before, young people, individuals with higher education, and rural residents are the most optimistic.
• Thirty-one percent of respondents consult a doctor or medical specialist regarding their health condition or recommendations less than once a year, 21–22% do so once a year or every six months, 15% at least once every three months, and only 11% use such services monthly.
• The vast majority of respondents (75%) know who their family doctor or therapist is, compared to 58% in 2017. Awareness is higher among women, rural residents, and those who use medical services more frequently. Nearly 70% of all respondents fully or partially trust their family doctor, compared to 53% in 2017. Among those who know their family doctor, 90% trust them.
• Eighty-two percent of respondents trust medical recommendations from healthcare workers, 68% trust relatives and acquaintances, and 67% trust pharmacists. Trust in medical information from the Internet, television, print media, and radio is significantly lower. Eleven percent trust information from folk healers, particularly among older respondents. Young people are more inclined to trust information from relatives and the Internet.
• When choosing a healthcare facility, 50% primarily consider the professionalism and experience of doctors, 42% consider trust in doctors at that institution, 23% consider the attitude of staff toward patients, 20% consider access to preferential services, and 16% consider availability of modern equipment. Comfort and speed of service are less important. Rural residents, younger and middle-aged individuals, and wealthier respondents prioritize professionalism more often. Urban residents and youth value attitude and equipment, while older and less affluent respondents emphasize trust.
• Sixty-four percent receive medical information from doctors, 40% from friends and family, 29% from pharmacists, 19% from the Internet, and 16% from television. Smaller shares rely on radio, magazines, folk healers, or religious leaders.
• Sixteen percent measure blood pressure daily, 28% several times a month, while others do so less frequently. One third of respondents have never experienced blood pressure problems, while others report varying frequency. Problems are more common among women and older individuals and among those experiencing higher stress.
• Ten percent measure body weight daily, while younger people and women do so more frequently. Forty percent undergo electrocardiograms less than once a year, while those with health issues do so more often. Nearly half check blood sugar less than once a year, and over half check cholesterol less than once a year.
• Half of respondents reported normal blood pressure at last measurement, while one third reported elevated levels. Most reported normal weight and normal blood sugar and cholesterol levels.
• Nearly half have never sought medical care related to cardiovascular diseases. Those who did are more often urban residents, women, and older individuals.
• Thirty percent believe there are enough cardiovascular treatment facilities in their locality, while half believe there are not. Rural residents are more critical.
• As in the previous year, the majority of respondents (81%) know nothing about Rivne region’s participation in the World Bank and Ministry of Health project “Improving Health Care at the Service of People.” Nevertheless, 76% believe its implementation is important. Among those aware of the project, over 90% consider it very important. More than half believe the project will improve the cardiovascular health situation in the region.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Zaporizhzhia region between November 16 and December 9, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results showed that residents of the region assess the situation in the country as a whole significantly worse than the situation at the local level.
• Only 8% of respondents assessed the political situation in the country as calm, while 36% consider the situation in their home region to be calm and 55% perceive the situation in their own city or village as calm. Almost 58% of respondents view the situation in the country as tense, and 29% describe it as critical. At the local level, assessments are somewhat better: between 33% and 46% of respondents see the situation as tense, while only about 10% consider it critical.
• Similarly, respondents assess the correctness of the direction of development of the country worse, at 12%, than that of the region, at 19%, or their own city or village, at 27%. Assessments of the direction of development of both the country and local areas are particularly critical among rural residents.
• At the same time, despite negative assessments of the current situation, overall expectations among residents of the region are rather neutral. The vast majority believe that the situation both in Ukraine as a whole and at the local level will not change in the coming year. One in six respondents has optimistic expectations about the future, while another 13–14% believe that the situation will worsen.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine, cited by 67% of respondents, and bribery and corruption in government, cited by 42%, are the two main nationwide problems according to residents of the region. At the personal level, respondents are more concerned about rising utility tariffs, mentioned by 63%, rising prices for basic goods and inflation, mentioned by 49%, and low wages and pensions, mentioned by 47%.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yuliia Tymoshenko, supported by 22.0% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Yurii Boiko is supported by 18.3%, Volodymyr Zelenskyi by 14.1%, Petro Poroshenko by 8.4%, Oleh Liashko by 7.5%, Yevhen Murayev by 6.5%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 5.1%, and Vadym Rabinovych by 3.8%. Other candidates have ratings below 3%. At the same time, 18% of respondents do not want to participate in voting, and another 13% have not decided on a candidate.
• Almost one quarter of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election. Over the past year, the number of those convinced of her victory has tripled. Fifteen percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 22% in 2017. About 10% expect Yurii Boiko to win. No more than 4% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. Confidence in victory is mainly observed among supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, and Boiko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Almost 60% of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna and the Opposition Bloc are the leaders. They are supported by 24.0% and 21.6% respectively among those who have decided and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 11.3%, Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” by 9.3%, the Radical Party by 7.0%, the party “Nashi” by 6.1%, Civic Position by 5.9%, and “For Life” by 4.5%. Other parties have ratings below 4%. At the same time, one quarter of respondents do not intend to participate in elections, and another 13% have not decided on a party.
• A candidate’s socio-economic program, cited by 65%, personal leadership qualities, cited by 58%, experience in politics, cited by 53%, and ability to ensure stability in the country, cited by 52%, are the motives that most strongly influence respondents’ presidential choice. For 38%, the presence of a strong team around the candidate is more important, 37% say that ensuring radical change matters more to them, and 30% are guided primarily by ideological views. Forty percent also noted that belonging to a new generation of politicians is important to them. This latter motive dominates among supporters of Zelenskyi and Murayev. Orientation toward cooperation with the European Union is important for 42%, while 30% place greater importance on cooperation with Russia. Respondents assess equally the importance of a candidate’s focus on solving problems both at the national and regional levels.
• Forty-seven percent of respondents expect that the situation in Ukraine will not change as a result of the upcoming presidential election. Another 26% believe that the situation will improve, and only 14% think it will worsen. Supporters of Tymoshenko and Poroshenko are more likely than others to expect positive changes. Respondents who do not intend to vote or who are undecided expect positive changes less often.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in presidential elections is higher at the national level, cited by 40%, than at the local level, cited by 19%. An additional 40% allow for the possibility of minor falsifications.
• At the same time, 13% of respondents have a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections, while another 28% take a neutral position. Fifty-five percent oppose this form of campaigning. Respondents from wealthier groups are the most negative toward such practices.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities significantly better than that of the central authorities. Only 10% of respondents are satisfied with the work of President Poroshenko, 11% are satisfied with the work of Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and only 6% are satisfied with the work of the Verkhovna Rada. At the same time, almost 90% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities. Assessments are more critical in rural areas.
• As in the previous year, 29% of respondents stated that they are satisfied with the work of the regional state administration. The share of those satisfied with the work of city or village heads also remained unchanged at 48%. At the same time, over the year the share of those dissatisfied with the regional state administration increased from 53% to 62%, and dissatisfaction with city or village heads increased from 44% to 47%. Satisfaction with local heads is higher among urban residents than among rural residents.
• Respondents somewhat more often perceive an increase in corruption nationwide than in the region or at their place of residence. At the same time, about 70% believe that the situation with bribery has not changed either at the central or local levels. Only 7–11% reported a decrease in corruption.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors and services. The situation in school education, personal safety, and road conditions receives relatively better evaluations. The worst assessments concern the fight against bribery at the local level. Over the past year, there have been virtually no changes across most criteria. Assessments of safety, road conditions, and agricultural development have improved somewhat, while evaluations of school education have worsened.
• Among opportunities in the region, respondents rated the ability to rest and spend leisure time the highest. The lowest-rated opportunities are engaging in entrepreneurship and finding a job. Opportunities for leisure, achieving success, job search, and entrepreneurship are assessed relatively better by urban residents. Safety of life is rated worst by residents of the regional center. Wealthier respondents assess all opportunities more positively than poorer ones.
• Respondents rate the economic development potential of Ukraine higher, at 26%, than that of the region, at 19%, and their own city, at 17%, over the next 5–10 years. More than 30% assess the potential as moderate. Only about one third see low potential, and 7–12% see no opportunities for economic growth at all, either nationally or locally. Rural residents assess growth potential more critically.
• Sixty-one percent of respondents feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, while 29% hold the opposite view. Slightly more respondents feel proud to be residents of their region, at 64%, and of their city or village, at 72%. At the same time, one in four to one in five respondents does not feel pride in belonging to their locality. A somewhat higher level of pride is observed among younger respondents. Most often, respondents cited history, at 52%, and nature, at 45%, as sources of regional pride. Thirty-seven percent are proud of local landmarks, 33% of local traditions, 19% of culture and art, 15% of local residents, and 14% of industry.
• Seventy-three percent consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 20% hold the opposite view. Feelings of happiness are more common among younger and wealthier respondents. Conversely, one quarter of older respondents and more than one third of those in the poorest category consider themselves unhappy.
• Residents of the region most often reported cultural and historical closeness to residents of Dnipropetrovsk region. They also somewhat more often selected Kharkiv and Kherson regions. Among neighboring countries, respondents most often consider themselves close to Russia and Belarus.
• Almost 34% expressed a desire to start their own business, while 55% expressed the opposite view. Four percent reported that they are already entrepreneurs. A higher desire to start a business is observed among younger respondents. Among wealthier respondents, 15% stated that they already run their own business. Among those wishing to start a business, 29% would choose trade. Ten to eleven percent would choose entertainment and leisure services, farming, or real estate sales and leasing. Eight to nine percent would choose IT, public catering, tourism, or the beauty and health industry.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents who would not like to work abroad decreased from 71% to 61%. At the same time, the share of those wishing to work in another country increased from 25% to 29%. Among those wishing to work abroad, 44% are willing in the future to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine, while 41% do not have such intentions. Migration aspirations are highest among youth, at 50%, urban residents, at 32%, and wealthier respondents, at 36%.
• Forty-three percent believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language. Twenty-nine percent support granting Russian official status in certain regions, while 24% support granting it the status of a state language.
• Fifty-four percent of respondents consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine, while 31% hold the opposite view. Another 15% were undecided.
• Over the past year, the share of those supporting Ukraine’s accession to the European Union decreased somewhat from 42% to 38%. Support for NATO membership also declined from 34% to 32%. When choosing one direction of international integration, 33% support integration with the European Union, 14% support accession to the Customs Union, and 39% favor equidistance from both the EU and Russia. Over the year, the share of supporters of equidistance decreased from 44% to 39%, while the share supporting accession to the Customs Union increased from 11% to 14%, as did the share of those undecided on this issue, from 5% to 15%.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Luhansk region between November 16 and December 16, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results shows that respondents assess the situation in their place of residence relatively better than the situation in the region as a whole and in the country overall.
• Only 5% of respondents described the political situation in the country as calm. Ten percent consider the situation in their home region to be calm, while 31% perceive the situation in their own city or village as calm. Around 50% of respondents view the situation in the country and in the region as tense, and 34–42% describe it as critical. In their own settlement, 40% consider the situation tense and 25% critical.
• Respondents also assess the correctness of the direction of development of the country (10%) and the region (9%) somewhat worse than that of their own city or village (17%). The local situation is evaluated more positively by residents of smaller settlements and by younger respondents.
• Overall expectations among residents of the region are predominantly neutral-negative. About 25–26% believe that the situation both in Ukraine and at the local level will worsen in the coming year. A relative majority, 42–43%, believe that the situation will not change, while 15–16% express optimistic expectations for the near future. Optimistic views are somewhat more common in small towns and villages and among younger respondents.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine is considered the most serious nationwide problem by residents of the region, with 68% identifying it as such. In addition, 41% regard unemployment as a major problem. At the personal level, respondents are primarily concerned about rising utility tariffs (47%), followed by the war in Donbas (45%) and low wages and pensions (42%). At the personal level, low income, the military conflict, and language issues concern residents of Sievierodonetsk and Lysychansk more strongly. For residents of Sievierodonetsk, inflation, corruption, and the healthcare sector are also more significant concerns, while for residents of Lysychansk and smaller settlements unemployment is a particularly pressing issue.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yurii Boiko, supported by 22.5% of respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Yuliia Tymoshenko is supported by 13.4%, Volodymyr Zelenskyi by 12.5%, Yevhen Murayev by 12.2%, Oleh Liashko by 8.5%, Petro Poroshenko by 6.1%, Vadym Rabinovych by 3.5%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 3.3%, and Serhii Taruta by 3.1%. Other candidates have ratings not exceeding 3%. At the same time, 32% of residents have not decided on a candidate, and nearly 16% do not intend to participate in the elections.
• Twenty-three percent of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election, which is almost five times higher than in the previous year. Eleven percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 6% in 2017. Approximately 6% consider a victory by Yurii Boiko or Volodymyr Zelenskyi likely. Fewer than 3% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. Confidence in electoral success is mainly observed among supporters of Tymoshenko and Poroshenko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Sixty-one percent of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, the Opposition Bloc leads with the support of 23.7% of respondents who have decided and intend to vote. Batkivshchyna is supported by 13.3%, the party “Nashi” by 11.1%, the party “Servant of the People” by 9.8%, “For Life” by 8.8%, the Radical Party by 6.6%, the party “Our Land” by 4.4%, and Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” by 4.1%. Other parties have ratings below 4%. At the same time, nearly one in four residents have not decided which party to support, and one in five does not intend to vote.
• The ability of a candidate to ensure stability in the country (70%), a socio-economic program (62%), and a focus on solving the problems of the country and the region (60%) are the motives that most strongly influence respondents’ presidential choice. Additionally, 54% choose a candidate because of leadership qualities, while for 40% the presence of a strong team is more important. For 51%, experience in state politics is important, while 41% say that belonging to a new generation of politicians matters more. The latter motive dominates among supporters of Zelenskyi and Murayev. For 41%, a candidate’s orientation toward cooperation with Russia is important, particularly among supporters of Boiko and Murayev, while for 37% cooperation with the European Union is more important, especially among supporters of Poroshenko.
• Forty-one percent of respondents believe that the situation in Ukraine will not change as a result of the upcoming presidential election. Twenty-nine percent expect it to improve, and 15% expect it to worsen. Supporters of Poroshenko are more likely than others to expect positive changes. Respondents who do not intend to vote expect positive changes less frequently.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in presidential elections is higher at the national level (54%) and at the regional level (48%) than in their own city or village (40%). About 30% of respondents also allow for the possibility of minor falsifications. Sixteen percent believe that there will be no falsifications in their locality.
• Nearly one third of residents in the region have a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections. Another 23% take a neutral stance, while about half, 47%, oppose this form of campaigning. Younger respondents, residents of Sievierodonetsk, and poorer population groups are more favorable toward such practices.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities somewhat better than that of regional and central authorities. Only 7% are satisfied with the work of President Poroshenko, 9% with Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and just 3% with the Verkhovna Rada. More than 80% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities.
• Only 10% are satisfied with the work of the regional state administration, while 67% are dissatisfied. However, over the year the share of those satisfied increased from 2% to 10%. Satisfaction with the work of city and village heads also increased noticeably, from 21% to 31%. Residents of small towns and villages are the most satisfied with local leaders, while residents of Lysychansk and Sievierodonetsk are the least satisfied.
• About 54% believe that the situation with bribery has worsened at the national level, and 38–46% hold the same view regarding the local level. Around 26–30% see no changes in corruption either nationwide or locally. Only 6–8% reported a decrease in corruption in the country and in the region.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors. The situation in school education, public safety, and the environment receives relatively better evaluations. Over the past year, improvements are observed in youth support, while deterioration is noted in school education, environmental conditions, and the fight against corruption. Industrial development receives the most negative evaluations.
• Overall, respondents assess the level of opportunities across all areas as low. Opportunities to live safely and to rest and spend leisure time are evaluated relatively better, while the ability to find a job is evaluated the worst. All areas of opportunity are rated higher by younger and wealthier respondents. Residents of Lysychansk and rural areas give lower evaluations, while residents of Sievierodonetsk and other small towns give higher ones.
• Only 4–5% see high economic development potential for Ukraine and their locality over the next 5–10 years. Around 22% assess the potential as moderate, while 35–37% consider it low. Another 21–25% see no opportunities for economic growth at all, either nationally or locally. Residents of small towns and villages and younger respondents assess growth potential more positively.
• Fifty-five percent feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, a sentiment slightly more common among the oldest respondents. Thirty-five percent do not feel such pride. About 60% feel proud to be residents of their region, and 66% of their city or village, although nearly one third do not take pride in their local origin. Respondents most often cited nature (33%) and history (27%) as sources of regional pride. Additionally, 20% are proud of local residents, 13% of sporting achievements, and 10–11% of economic activity and natural resources. Twelve percent stated that nothing makes them proud of their region.
• More than 60% consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 32% hold the opposite view. Feelings of happiness are more common among younger and wealthier respondents. Conversely, 44% of older respondents and 48% of those in the poorest group consider themselves unhappy.
• Residents of the region most often report cultural and historical closeness to residents of neighboring Donetsk and Kharkiv regions. Among neighboring countries, they consider themselves closest to Russia, and somewhat less close to Belarus.
• About 35% expressed a desire to start their own business, while 5% reported that they are already entrepreneurs. A slightly higher desire to start a business is observed among residents of Sievierodonetsk and other small towns, as well as among younger and wealthier respondents. Among the latter, 22% stated that they already run their own business. Among those wishing to start a business, 32% would choose trade, while about 13% would choose construction or farming.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents who expressed a desire to work abroad increased from 21% to 31%. Among them, 60% are willing to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine, while 35% are not. Traditionally, migration intentions are highest among youth (59%) and wealthier respondents (43%).
• Thirty-nine percent support granting Russian the status of a state language, while another 28% support granting it official status in certain regions. Thirty-one percent believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language.
• Only 30% consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine. Fifty-five percent hold the opposite view, and 15% are undecided.
• Support for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union increased slightly over the year, from 27% to 30%, while opposition also increased, from 33% to 47%. Support for NATO membership remained almost unchanged at 21–23%, but opposition to joining the North Atlantic Alliance rose from 36% to 60%. Regarding foreign economic integration, 23% support a pro-European vector, 25% support joining the Customs Union, which is twice as high as in 2017, while 35% favor equidistance between Russia and the West, compared to 46% in 2017.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Mykolaiv region between November 16 and December 9, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results showed that residents of the region assess the situation in the country as a whole somewhat worse than the situation at the local level.
• Only 5% of respondents described the political situation in the country as calm, while 21% consider the situation in their home region to be calm and 33% perceive the situation in their own city or village as calm. Almost 68% of respondents view the situation in the country as tense, and 25% describe it as critical. At the local level, assessments are somewhat better: between 50% and 60% of respondents see the situation as tense, while only about 12–15% consider it critical.
• Respondents also assess the correctness of the direction of development of the country and the region somewhat worse, at 12% and 13% respectively, than that of their own city or village, which stands at 17%.
• At the same time, despite negative assessments of the current situation, overall expectations among residents of the region are rather neutral. More than 40% of respondents believe that the situation both in Ukraine as a whole and at the local level will not change in the coming year. One in five believes that it will worsen, while 15% have optimistic expectations about the future. Residents of rural areas are the least likely to expect improvements both at the national and local levels.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine, cited by 74% of respondents, and bribery and corruption in government, cited by 55%, are the two main nationwide problems according to residents of the region. At the personal level, respondents are more concerned about rising utility tariffs (62%), low wages and pensions (61%), and rising prices for basic goods and inflation (50%). Problems such as low wages and pensions and inflation are felt more acutely in the regional center and in rural areas. Residents of small towns more often mentioned the inability to obtain quality medical care.
• The leaders of the presidential rating in the region are Yuliia Tymoshenko and Volodymyr Zelenskyi, supported by 20.3% and 19.8% respectively among those who have decided and intend to vote. Yurii Boiko is supported by 15.2%, Oleh Liashko by 8.2%, Petro Poroshenko by 6.4%, Yevhen Murayev by 6.3%, Oleksandr Shevchenko by 5.0%, and Anatolii Hrytsenko by 4.6%. Other candidates have ratings below 4%. At the same time, almost one third of residents of the region have not decided on a candidate, and one in six does not intend to participate in voting.
• Almost 16% of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election. Over the past year, the number of those convinced of her victory has nearly doubled. Six percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 8% in 2017. Four percent expect Yurii Boiko to win, and 3% expect Volodymyr Zelenskyi to win. No more than 3% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. Confidence in victory is mainly observed among supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, and Boiko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Sixty-four percent of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna leads with the support of 19.5% of respondents who have decided and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 16.6%, the Opposition Bloc by 14.6%, the Radical Party by 9.2%, the party “Nashi” by 6.3%, “For Life” by 5.9%, Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” by 5.5%, and Civic Position by 4.6%. Other parties have ratings below 4%. At the same time, nearly 28% of residents of the region have not decided which party to support, and 22% do not intend to participate in voting.
• Personal leadership qualities of a candidate, cited by 69%, and their socio-economic program, cited by 64%, are the motives that most strongly influence respondents’ presidential choice. For 57%, experience in state politics is important, while 38% say that belonging to a new generation of politicians matters more. This latter motive dominates among supporters of Zelenskyi and Murayev. A candidate’s focus on solving the country’s problems overall is a motive for 53% of respondents, while for 40% it is important that the candidate also focuses on solving regional problems. Orientation toward cooperation with the European Union is important for 48%, while 23% place greater importance on cooperation with Russia. Respondents are evenly divided between preferring a candidate’s ability to ensure stability in the country and support for radical change.
• Twenty-seven percent of respondents expect that the situation in Ukraine will improve as a result of the upcoming presidential election. Thirty-four percent believe that the situation will not change, and only 13% think it will worsen. About one quarter of respondents were unable to answer this question. Supporters of Poroshenko, Tymoshenko, and Boiko are more likely than others to expect positive changes. Respondents who do not intend to vote or who are undecided expect positive changes less often.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in presidential elections is higher at the national level, cited by 62%, than at the local level, cited by 37%. An additional 25–35% allow for the possibility of minor falsifications.
• Only 8% of respondents have a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections. Seventeen percent take a neutral position, while 70% oppose this form of campaigning. Residents of small towns and poorer respondents are more favorable toward such practices.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities much better than that of the central authorities. Only 8% of respondents are satisfied with the work of President Poroshenko and Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and just 3% are satisfied with the work of the Verkhovna Rada. At the same time, about 90% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities.
• Over the course of the year, satisfaction with the work of the regional state administration declined from 27% to 13%, as did satisfaction with the work of city and village heads, from 40% to 32%. The share of those dissatisfied with the regional state administration and with city or village heads increased compared to the previous year, from 51% to 72% and from 45% to 59% respectively. The lowest level of satisfaction with the regional state administration is observed in the regional center, while dissatisfaction with city or village heads is highest in small towns.
• Respondents more often perceive an increase in corruption nationwide than in the region or in their place of residence. About 60% believe that the situation with bribery has not changed either at the central or local levels. Only 3–6% reported a decrease in corruption.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors and services. The situation in school education receives relatively better evaluations. The worst assessments concern the fight against bribery at the local level, industrial development, and youth support. Over the past year, negative dynamics are observed across all criteria.
• Among opportunities in the region, respondents rated the ability to rest and spend leisure time, as well as to live safely, the highest. The lowest-rated opportunity is achieving success. All opportunities are evaluated relatively higher by residents of the regional center and lowest by residents of rural areas. Younger and wealthier respondents assess all opportunities more positively than older and poorer respondents.
• About 7% see high economic development potential for Ukraine, the region, and their city or village over the next 5–10 years. About one quarter assess the potential as moderate. More than one third see low potential, and 6–13% see no opportunities for economic growth at all, either nationally or locally. One in five respondents hesitated to answer, most of whom are residents of rural areas. Residents of small towns assess growth potential somewhat higher.
• More than half of respondents, 57%, feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, while 24% hold the opposite view. Slightly more respondents feel proud to be residents of their region, at 61%, and of their city or village, at 65%. At the same time, 17–19% do not feel pride in belonging to a particular region. Most often, respondents cited nature, at 42%, and history, at 39%, as sources of regional pride. Pride in local residents was cited by 25%, traditions by 19%, culture and art and natural resources by 16% each, sporting achievements by 15%, prominent regional figures by 13%, and agriculture as well as science and education by 11% each.
• Almost 55% consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 28% hold the opposite view. Feelings of happiness are more common among urban residents, younger respondents, and wealthier individuals. Conversely, 38% of older respondents and 48% of those in the poorest category consider themselves unhappy.
• Residents of the region more often reported cultural and historical closeness to residents of Odesa and Kherson regions. Among neighboring countries, respondents most often consider themselves closest to Belarus and Russia, and less frequently to Poland and Moldova.
• Almost 24% expressed a desire to start their own business, while 57% have no such aspirations. Seven percent reported that they are already entrepreneurs. A higher desire to start a business is observed among residents of small towns, younger respondents, and wealthier individuals. Within the middle-income group, 12% stated that they already run their own business. Among those wishing to start a business, 39% would choose trade, 18% farming, 7–9% transport services, entertainment and leisure, or construction, and 6% auto services, tourism, and the beauty and health industry.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents who expressed a desire to work abroad has remained almost unchanged at 31%. At the same time, the share of those who do not seek employment abroad declined from 64% to 59%. Thirty-nine percent are willing in the future to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine, while 40% do not express such intentions. Traditionally, migration aspirations are highest among youth, at 58%, and wealthier respondents, at 37%. Residents of small towns and villages are more inclined to consider working abroad than residents of the regional center.
• Sixty percent believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language. Nineteen percent support granting Russian the status of a state language, and 16% support granting it official status in certain regions.
• Forty-two percent of respondents consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine, while 34% hold the opposite view. Nearly one quarter were undecided.
• Over the past year, the share of those supporting Ukraine’s accession to the European Union increased from 34% to 39%, and support for NATO membership rose from 23% to 27%. At the same time, the share of opponents decreased. Among different directions of foreign economic integration, the majority support equidistance between Russia and the West, at 44%. Over the past year, the share of those favoring accession to the Customs Union declined from 14% to 9%, while support for a pro-European vector increased from 30% to 34%.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Donetsk region between November 16 and December 9, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents participated in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results shows that respondents assess the situation in the country as a whole and in the region worse than the situation in their own city or village.
• Only 4% of respondents described the political situation in the country as calm. Eight percent consider the situation in their home region to be calm, while 27% perceive the situation in their own city or village as calm. Almost 48% of respondents view the situation in the country and in the region as tense, and around 40% describe it as critical. Assessments of the situation in respondents’ own city or village are somewhat better: 40% describe it as tense and 25% as critical.
• Similarly, respondents evaluate the correctness of the direction of development of the country and the region worse (around 12%) than that of their own city or village (26%). Residents of Mariupol assess the direction of development in their city or village more positively than residents of other cities and villages. Higher evaluations are also more common among older respondents.
• Overall expectations among residents of the region are predominantly negative or neutral. About 45% of respondents believe that the situation both in Ukraine and at the local level will not change in the coming year. Between 18% and 24% believe that it will worsen. Optimistic expectations are expressed by 14–19% of respondents. Respondents somewhat more often expect deterioration at the national level than at the local level.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine is considered the main nationwide problem by residents of the region, with 68% identifying it as such. At the personal level, respondents are also concerned about the war in Donbas (51%), rising utility tariffs (47%), and low wages and pensions (45%). Socio-economic problems such as low wages and pensions and inflation are felt more acinclude among rural residents and residents of Mariupol. Urban residents more often mention rising utility tariffs and unfavorable conditions for the development of small and medium-sized businesses.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yurii Boiko, supported by 19.2% of respondents who have decided on their choice and intend to vote. Volodymyr Zelenskyi is supported by 16.1%, Yevhen Murayev by 13.9%, Yuliia Tymoshenko by 12.0%, Petro Poroshenko by 6.1%, Oleh Liashko by 5.9%, Vadym Rabinovych by 5.8%, and Serhii Taruta and Anatolii Hrytsenko by 3.2% each. Other candidates have ratings below 3%. At the same time, nearly 13% of residents have not decided whom to support, and 14% would not participate in the vote.
• Yuliia Tymoshenko is the candidate whose victory respondents believe in the most. Over the past year, the share of those confident in her victory increased from 11% to 19%. About 12% believe in a victory by Volodymyr Zelenskyi. Eleven percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 13% in 2017. Nearly 9% believe Yurii Boiko will win. No more than 4% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. Confidence in electoral success is most common among supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, Zelenskyi, and Boiko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Almost 60% of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, the Opposition Bloc leads with 19.3% among those who have decided and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 15.4%, Batkivshchyna by 13.5%, the party “Nashi” by 12.7%, “For Life” by 10.0%, Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” by 5.6%, the Radical Party by 5.1%, “Osnova” by 3.6%, and “Civic Position” by 2.9%. Other parties have ratings below 2%. At the same time, nearly one in ten residents has not decided which party to support, and one in six does not intend to vote.
• The ability of a candidate to ensure stability in the country (65%) and their socio-economic program (62%) are the most influential motives in respondents’ presidential choice. Fifty-five percent choose a candidate primarily because of leadership qualities, while 38% place greater importance on the presence of a strong team. For 52%, experience in state politics is important, while 37% say that belonging to a new generation of politicians matters more. The latter motive dominates among supporters of Zelenskyi and Murayev. Orientation toward solving national problems is a motive for 39% of respondents, while for a majority of 58% it is important that the candidate focuses on solving both national and regional problems. For 40%, orientation toward cooperation with the EU is important, while for 34% cooperation with Russia is more important. Another 26% were unable to answer this question.
• Thirty-three percent of respondents expect the situation in Ukraine to improve as a result of the upcoming presidential election. Thirty-five percent believe it will not change, and only 14% believe it will worsen. About one fifth were undecided. Supporters of Poroshenko and Tymoshenko most often expect positive changes. Respondents who do not intend to vote or have not decided are less optimistic.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in presidential elections is higher at the national level (54%) than at the regional (46%) or local (37%) levels. Around 30% also allow for minor falsifications.
• At the same time, 21% of respondents have a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections. Twenty-nine percent take a neutral stance, while 48% oppose this form of campaigning. Rural residents are more favorable toward such practices.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities significantly better than that of central authorities. Eight percent are satisfied with the work of President Poroshenko, 11% with Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and only 5% with the Verkhovna Rada. More than 80% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities. More critical assessments of the President and Prime Minister are found in rural areas.
• Over the year, satisfaction with the work of the regional state administration decreased from 28% to 17%, while dissatisfaction increased from 46% to 59%. Satisfaction with the work of city and village mayors remained at 47%, as in the previous year. Residents of Mariupol are more satisfied with their local leaders than residents of small towns and villages.
• Respondents more often perceive an increase in corruption at the national level than at the regional or local level. Between 37% and 40% believe the situation with bribery has not changed at any level. Only 6–11% believe corruption has decreased.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors and services. Over the past year, most indicators show either negative dynamics or no change. Respondents assess road conditions, school education, and public safety and crime prevention relatively better. Declines are noted in indices related to school education, social protection, youth support, healthcare, industrial development, and anti-corruption efforts. The last two areas received the lowest evaluations.
• Overall, respondents assess opportunities in the region as low. Leisure and recreation opportunities receive relatively better evaluations, while the worst assessments concern living in safety. Residents of Mariupol rate opportunities for leisure, success, and employment higher than residents of small towns and villages. Opportunities for entrepreneurship are rated slightly higher by rural residents. At the same time, rural residents assess safety opportunities more pessimistically. Wealthier respondents rate all opportunities higher than poorer ones.
• Only 3–5% see high economic development potential for Ukraine, the region, or their city or village over the next 5–10 years. Around 30% assess it as moderate. More than one third see low potential, and 15–17% see no potential for economic growth at all. Rural residents assess the development potential of the country and region less critically. Residents of Mariupol rate the development potential of their city higher than residents of small towns and villages.
• Fifty-three percent of respondents feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, while 29% feel the opposite. Pride is even higher regarding their region (67%) and their city or village (72%). Respondents most often cite nature (33%) and history (29%) as sources of pride. Sporting achievements are mentioned by 27%, industry and local residents by 26% each, natural resources by 23%, notable people by 20%, traditions by 17%, culture and arts by 14%, and landmarks by 12%.
• Sixty-four percent consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 29% do not. Feelings of happiness are more common among rural residents, younger respondents, and wealthier individuals. Conversely, 32% of older respondents and 41% of the poorest consider themselves unhappy.
• Residents of the region most often note cultural and historical closeness to residents of Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk regions. They also report some closeness to Zaporizhzhia, Odesa, Luhansk regions, and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Among neighboring countries, respondents feel closest to Russia and Belarus, and partially to Poland and Moldova.
• Nearly 40% expressed a desire to start their own business, while 49% expressed the opposite view. Six percent reported that they are already entrepreneurs. A higher desire to start a business is observed among residents of small towns and villages, younger respondents, and wealthier individuals. Among the latter, 20% already run their own business. Among those wishing to start a business, 33% would choose trade, 19% entertainment and recreation, 14–15% tourism and construction, 10–11% beauty and health services, catering, and farming.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents who would like to work abroad increased from 21% to 35%. Among them, 58% are willing to invest earned money in starting a business in Ukraine, while 34% are not. Migration intentions are highest among youth (57%) and wealthier respondents (46%).
• Thirty-seven percent support granting Russian the status of a state language, 30% support granting it official status in certain regions, and 31% believe Ukrainian should be the only state language.
• Thirty-two percent consider Russia an aggressor country toward Ukraine, while 51% hold the opposite view and 17% were undecided.
• Over the past year, support for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union increased from 25% to 30%, while opposition remained unchanged at 48%. Opposition to NATO membership increased from 56% to 62%, while support stands at 18%, compared to 21% in 2017. Regarding foreign economic integration, 42% support equidistance between Russia and the West, compared to 39% in 2017. About 22% support EU membership, and approximately the same share support joining the Customs Union.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Sumy region between November 16 and December 9, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results showed that residents of the region assess the situation in the country as a whole significantly worse than the situation at the local level.
• Only 5% of respondents assessed the political situation in the country as calm, while 39% see the situation in the region as calm and 47% describe the situation in their own city or village as calm. Sixty-three percent of respondents view the situation in the country as tense, and 25% as critical. In the region, 42% see the situation as tense, while in their own city or village this figure is 35%, and only about 10% consider the local situation to be critical.
• Respondents assess the correctness of the direction of development of the country at 14%, which is worse than assessments of their home region at 21% and their own city or village at 23%. Representatives of the older generation and residents of rural areas are somewhat more optimistic in these assessments.
• Despite negative evaluations of the current situation, overall expectations among residents of the region are rather neutral-positive. About 15% believe that the situation both in Ukraine and locally will improve next year. The overwhelming majority think that the situation will not change, at 46–47%. At the same time, 22–23% believe that the situation will worsen.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine, cited by 74%, is considered the largest nationwide problem by residents of the region. At the personal level, respondents are more concerned about rising utility tariffs, cited by 58%, as well as low incomes and inflation, cited by 51% each. At the level of personal concerns, low income and high prices are less troubling for residents of small towns, while they are more acute for residents of the regional center and rural areas.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yuliia Tymoshenko, supported by 23.7% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Petro Poroshenko is supported by 10.3%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 10.0%, Volodymyr Zelenskyi by 9.7%, Yurii Boiko by 8.2%, Oleh Liashko by 6.9%, Oleksandr Shevchenko by 5.6%, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk by 3.5%, and Yevhenii Muraiev by 3.0%. Other candidates have ratings below 3%. At the same time, 22.1% of respondents have not decided on a candidate, and another 14.2% do not intend to participate in voting.
• Seventeen percent of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election. Over the past year, the number of those convinced of her victory has increased somewhat. Eight percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 10% in 2017. About 4% consider a victory by Yurii Boiko to be likely, while 3% see Volodymyr Zelenskyi or Anatolii Hrytsenko as likely winners, and 2% see Oleh Liashko as such. Fewer than 2% believe in the victory of other candidates. Confidence in their favorites is mainly expressed by supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, and Boiko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Forty-three percent of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna is the leader, supported by 25.9% of those who have decided and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 10.1%, Civic Position by 9.5%, Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” by 9.2%, the Opposition Bloc by 7.9%, the Radical Party by 5.6%, and UKROP by 5.1%. Other parties have ratings of no more than 4%. At the same time, 20.2% have not decided on a party choice, and 17.2% do not intend to participate in elections.
• When choosing motives for voting for presidential candidates, 53% take into account the candidate’s orientation toward closer cooperation with the European Union, while 18% consider cooperation with Russia, which is more relevant for supporters of Yurii Boiko. For 53%, the candidate’s personal leadership qualities are important, while for 31% the candidate’s team matters. A socio-economic program is a motive for 49%, while 34% pay more attention to the candidate’s ideological views. Forty-six percent believe it is important that the candidate be oriented toward solving the country’s problems, while for 35% attention to both the country and their region is important. For 48%, experience in politics is important, while 34% say that belonging to the group of “new politicians” matters more to them, especially among younger voters and supporters of Yevhenii Muraiev, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk, and Oleksandr Shevchenko. When choosing between radical change and ensuring stability, 36% choose radical change, while 45% prefer stability.
• Twenty-six percent believe that the situation in Ukraine will not change as a result of the upcoming elections, 24% think it will worsen, and 22% believe it will improve. Supporters of Petro Poroshenko and Yuliia Tymoshenko most often expect positive changes. Significantly fewer positive changes are expected by respondents who do not intend to vote.
• Forty-six percent of respondents consider electoral fraud at the national level to be likely, 39% consider it likely at the regional level, and 35% at the level of their city or village. Another approximately 35% allow for the possibility of minor falsifications. Twelve percent believe that there will definitely be no fraud in their settlement.
• Fifteen percent of respondents have a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections. Twenty-eight percent take a neutral position, while 53% oppose this form of campaigning. Residents of rural areas and the poorest respondents are more favorable toward the distribution of assistance.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities better than that of the central authorities. Only 8% of respondents are satisfied with the work of President Petro Poroshenko, the same share with the work of Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and 5% with the Verkhovna Rada. At the same time, more than 80% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities.
• Over the past year, satisfaction with the work of the regional state administration has remained almost unchanged, at 21–22%, while satisfaction with the work of city or village heads has increased slightly from 26% to 29%. Satisfaction with local heads is somewhat higher among rural residents.
• Respondents more often observe an increase in corruption at the national level, cited by 41%, than in the region or at their place of residence, cited by 29–30%. Forty-six percent believe that the situation with bribery has not changed at the central level, while 53–55% hold the same view regarding their local area. Only 2–3% reported a decrease in corruption.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors and services. Overall, relatively better evaluations are given to school education and the development of agriculture. In most sectors, negative dynamics or a lack of change are observed. Assessments of social protection and agricultural development have increased somewhat, while evaluations of ecology, healthcare, and the fight against corruption have declined noticeably. The latter area received the worst assessments.
• Among opportunities in the region, respondents rated the ability to rest and spend leisure time the highest, and finding a job the lowest. Almost all areas of opportunity are rated higher by wealthier respondents and residents of the regional center. Younger respondents also give higher evaluations, with the exception of opportunities for entrepreneurship.
• Only 6–9% see high economic development potential for Ukraine, the region, and their own city or village over the next 5–10 years. About 30% assess the potential as moderate. Between 42% and 44% see low potential, while 9–10% see no opportunities for economic growth at all, whether in Ukraine, the region, or their own settlement. Residents of small towns and younger respondents assess growth potential somewhat more positively.
• Seventy-one percent feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, while 18% hold the opposite view. The same share, 71%, feel proud to be residents of their region, and 74% of their city or village. People of middle age feel pride somewhat less often. Most often, pride in the region is associated with nature, cited by 47%, and history, cited by 46%. Twenty-three percent are proud of local residents, 21% of local traditions, 18% of culture and art, and 15% of landmarks.
• About 55% consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 28% hold the opposite view. Feelings of personal happiness are more common among younger and wealthier respondents and residents of cities. At the same time, 33% of rural residents, 35% of older respondents, and 48% of the poorest respondents consider themselves unhappy.
• Residents of the region most often noted cultural and historical closeness to residents of Poltava and Kharkiv regions. Among neighboring countries, residents consider themselves close to Belarus, somewhat less to Russia, and partially to Poland.
• About one third expressed a desire to start their own business, while more than half, 54%, do not have such a desire. Only 4% reported that they are already entrepreneurs. A higher desire to start a business is observed among urban residents, younger respondents, and wealthier respondents. Among the latter, 21% stated that they already run a business. Among those wishing to start a business, 25% would choose trade, 15% construction and repairs, 11–12% logistics, entertainment, and beauty services, 10% auto service or IT, and slightly under 10% tourism, farming, and real estate.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents wishing to work abroad has remained almost unchanged, at 38–39%, while the number of those who do not want to do so increased slightly from 52% to 56%. Forty-six percent of those wishing to emigrate are ready in the future to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine, while 35% are not. Migration aspirations are highest among youth, at 69%, wealthier respondents, at 46–51%, and residents of the regional center, at 42%.
• About 60% believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language. Twenty-two percent support granting Russian official status in certain regions, while 10% support granting Russian the status of a state language.
• Sixty percent consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine, 22% hold the opposite view, and 18% were unable to answer.
• Support for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union increased over the year from 50% to 55%, as did support for NATO membership, from 37% to 45%. Among different directions of foreign economic integration, the pro-European vector leads at 47%, accession to the Customs Union is supported by 9%, and 24% support Ukraine maintaining equal distance from both Russia and the West.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Chernivtsi region between November 16 and December 5, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results showed that residents of the region assess the situation in the country as a whole significantly worse than the situation at the local level.
• Only 7% of respondents assessed the political situation in the country as calm, while one third of respondents consider the situation in their home region to be calm and almost half perceive the situation in their own city or village as calm. More than 60% of respondents view the situation in the country as tense, and one quarter describe it as critical. At the local level, assessments are somewhat better: between 31% and 42% of respondents see the situation as tense, while one in ten considers it critical.
• Similarly, respondents assess the correctness of the direction of development of the country significantly worse, at 12%, than that of the region, at 20%, or their own city or village, at 27%. While assessments of the country’s direction of development are almost equally critical among residents of different types of settlements, negative assessments of the direction of development at the local level are significantly more common among residents of the regional center.
• At the same time, despite negative assessments of the current situation, overall expectations among residents of the region are rather positive-neutral. Between 22% and 25% have optimistic expectations for the future, most notably regarding their own settlement. Between 43% and 44% believe that the situation will not change. At the same time, 13–18% of respondents believe that the situation both in Ukraine and locally will worsen in the coming year.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine, cited by 67% of respondents, and bribery and corruption in government, cited by 45%, are the two main nationwide problems according to residents of the region. At the personal level, respondents are more concerned about rising utility tariffs and low wages and pensions, cited by 53% and 51% respectively. These problems concern residents of the entire region equally, while rising prices for basic goods are somewhat more significant for residents of small towns, and bribery and corruption in government are more significant for residents of the regional center.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yuliia Tymoshenko, supported by 21.1% of those who have decided and intend to vote. Petro Poroshenko is supported by 11.9%, Yurii Boiko and Volodymyr Zelenskyi by 10.7% and 10.5% respectively, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 8.8%, Oleh Liashko by 8.2%, Oleksandr Shevchenko by 7.3%, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk by 6.2%, and Andrii Sadovyi and Arsenii Yatseniuk by 4.1% each. Other candidates have ratings below 3%. At the same time, 16.6% of residents of the region have not decided on a candidate.
• Seventeen point seven percent of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election. Over the past year, the number of those convinced of her victory has almost doubled. One in ten respondents is confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, which is more than one and a half times lower than last year’s figure of 17%. Six percent of respondents see Yurii Boiko and Volodymyr Zelenskyi as potential winners. Fewer than 5% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. The greatest confidence in their favorites is demonstrated by supporters of Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, and Boiko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Almost 44% of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna is the leader, supported by 22.4% of those who have decided and intend to vote. The party “Servant of the People” is supported by 12.2%, Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” and the Opposition Bloc by 11% each, Civic Position and the Radical Party by 8.9% and 8.3% respectively, UKROP by 6.5%, and the People’s Front and Samopomich by 4.8% each. Other parties have ratings below 3%. At the same time, almost 19% of residents of the region have not decided on a party, and one in ten does not intend to vote.
• Orientation of a candidate toward closer cooperation with the European Union, cited by 84%, is the motive that has the strongest determining influence on respondents’ presidential choice. For two thirds, the candidate’s socio-economic program is significant, while for 29%, ideological views are more important. For 60%, personal leadership qualities and orientation toward solving nationwide problems are important, while for 31–35%, the presence of a strong team and orientation toward solving both national and regional problems matter more. Fifty-five percent focus on the candidate’s ability to ensure radical changes in the country, while 40% say that maintaining stability is more important to them. Fifty-seven percent choose based on the candidate’s experience in state politics, while 35%, on the contrary, are attracted by the candidate’s belonging to a new generation of politicians.
• More than one third of respondents expect that the situation in Ukraine will improve as a result of the upcoming presidential elections. The same share believes that the situation will not change, while one in ten says it will worsen, and another one in five is undecided. Supporters of Tymoshenko, Zelenskyi, and Poroshenko expect positive changes more often than others. Relatively fewer positive changes are expected by respondents who are undecided or do not intend to vote. Moreover, more than 40% of the latter expect the situation to worsen as a result of the elections.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in presidential elections is higher at the national level, cited by 50%, than at the local level, cited by 35–40%. An additional 27–32% allow for the possibility of minor falsifications at all levels.
• One in ten respondents has a positive attitude toward situations in which politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections. Almost 20% take a neutral position on this issue. On the other hand, two thirds oppose this form of campaigning. Representatives of the oldest age group are somewhat more favorable toward candidates distributing assistance.
• Residents of the region assess the work of local authorities significantly better than that of the central authorities. Only one in ten respondents is satisfied with the work of President Petro Poroshenko, Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. At the same time, more than 80% expressed dissatisfaction with the central authorities.
• Over the past year, the level of satisfaction with the work of the regional state administration decreased from 30% to 22%, as did satisfaction with the work of city or village heads, from 38% to 34%. The most critical attitudes toward local authorities are expressed by residents of the regional center.
• Respondents notice an increase in corruption more often at the national level than in the region or at their place of residence. More than half of respondents believe that the situation with bribery has not changed at either the central or local levels. Only 2–4% reported a decrease in corruption at the national and regional levels, while at the level of their own settlement, one in ten respondents reported such a decrease.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the state of affairs in various sectors and services. Relatively better assessments were recorded for school education and road conditions. Over the year, negative dynamics were observed for most criteria, most notably in school education, healthcare, ecology, and the fight against bribery. Road conditions are an exception, as assessments in this area have improved. The worst evaluations concern the fight against corruption at the local level.
• Among opportunities in the region, respondents rated the ability to rest and spend leisure time the highest, and engaging in entrepreneurship the lowest. Opportunities for leisure, personal safety, achieving success, job search, and entrepreneurship are rated relatively higher by residents of the regional center. The lowest assessments across all opportunities are given by the oldest and poorest respondents.
• Only 6–8% of respondents see high economic development potential for Ukraine, the region, and their own city or village over the next 5–10 years. About 40% assess the potential as moderate. At the same time, 28–32% see low economic development potential, and one in ten sees no prospects for economic growth at all, especially for Ukraine. Younger people are naturally more optimistic in their assessments.
• An absolute majority of respondents feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, at 81%, and especially residents of their region, at 84%, and their city or village, at 87%. Most often, respondents cited local traditions, at 41%, as a source of regional pride, while about one quarter are proud of the region’s history and nature. One in five is proud of local residents, culture, and art, and 17% of notable figures from the region.
• The vast majority of respondents, 80%, consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while almost one in ten holds the opposite view. Feelings of personal happiness are more common among younger and wealthier respondents, as well as residents of small towns and villages.
• Forty percent of respondents noted cultural and historical closeness to residents of Ivano-Frankivsk region, while almost one quarter indicated closeness to Ternopil and Lviv regions. Among neighboring countries, residents of the region consider themselves closest to Romania, Poland, and Moldova.
• More than one third of respondents expressed a desire to start their own business, especially among youth. At the same time, more than 40% do not have such intentions, with the lowest interest observed among the oldest age group and the poorest respondents. Five percent reported that they are already entrepreneurs, most often in the regional center, among middle-aged and wealthier respondents. Among the latter, one quarter stated that they already run their own business. Among those wishing to start a business, 41% would choose trade. Another 12% would choose public catering or farming, one in ten would choose tourism, construction and repairs, or auto service businesses.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents wishing to work abroad has remained almost unchanged, at 42% in 2017 and 41% in 2018, while only one third of them are willing in the future to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine. Thirty-nine percent are not willing to do so. Migration aspirations are highest among youth and middle-aged respondents, at 64% and 45% respectively, urban residents, at 42–44%, and respondents with a middle level of income, at 48%.
• The vast majority of respondents, 71%, believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language. One in five supports granting Russian official status in certain regions, and only 2% support granting Russian the status of a state language throughout Ukraine.
• Almost 80% of respondents consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine. At the same time, one in ten holds the opposite view, and 11% are undecided.
• Over the past year, the share of those supporting Ukraine’s accession to the European Union increased slightly from 68% to 70%, while the level of support for NATO integration remained unchanged at 59%. Among different directions of foreign economic integration, the pro-European vector remains dominant, although its dynamics are somewhat negative, decreasing from 67% to 65%. The share of those supporting equidistance between Ukraine and both Russia and the West increased from 15% to 18%. Support for accession to the Customs Union is currently only 2%, which is three times lower than in the previous year.

• Within the framework of the project “Portraits of Regions,” the Rating Group conducted a survey among residents of Zakarpattia region between November 16 and December 13, 2018. In total, 1,600 respondents took part in the study, which was carried out using the face-to-face interview method. The sample was formed taking into account the age and gender structure of the region as well as the type of settlement. The margin of error does not exceed 2.4%.
• Analysis of the survey results showed that respondents assess the situation at their place of residence more positively than the situation in the region and in the country as a whole.
• Only 7% assessed the political situation in the country as calm. In their home region, 17% consider the situation calm, while in their own city or village this figure reaches 46%. Sixty-one percent of respondents view the situation in the country as tense, and 29% as critical. In the region, 66% consider the situation tense, while assessments are somewhat better in respondents’ own settlements, where 41% see the situation as tense. Only about 5% consider the situation at the local level to be critical.
• Respondents also assess the correctness of the direction of the country’s development more negatively, at 12%, than that of the region, at 21%, or their own city or village, at 30%. The situation at the local level is assessed more positively by older respondents and residents of smaller towns and villages in the region.
• Despite negative assessments of the current state of affairs, overall expectations among residents of the region are rather positive-neutral. Fifty-six percent believe that the situation in the country will not change, 25% think it will worsen next year, and 10% expect improvement. At the local level, 61–64% believe that the situation will remain unchanged, while 9–13% expect deterioration. Optimistic expectations for the coming year are expressed by 14% regarding the region and by 20% regarding their own settlement.
• The military conflict in Eastern Ukraine, cited by 77%, is considered the most significant nationwide problem by residents of the region. At the personal level, respondents are most concerned about rising utility tariffs, cited by 54%, and low wages and pensions, cited by 51%. At the personal level, problems of unemployment and access to medical services are felt more acutely in villages, while issues related to tariffs, inflation, social protection, corruption, war, and language rights are more troubling for residents of the regional center.
• The leader of the presidential rating in the region is Yuliia Tymoshenko, supported by 20.3% of those who have decided and intend to participate in the elections. Petro Poroshenko is supported by 14.7%, Yurii Boiko by 9.5%, Anatolii Hrytsenko by 8.5%, Oleh Liashko by 8.3%, Vadym Rabinovych by 6.5%, Volodymyr Zelenskyi by 6.0%, Andrii Sadovyi by 5.6%, Sviatoslav Vakarchuk by 4.8%, and Oleksandr Shevchenko by 4.2%. Other candidates have ratings not exceeding 3%. One quarter of respondents do not intend to participate in voting, and one in ten residents of the region has not decided on a candidate.
• Fourteen percent of respondents believe that Yuliia Tymoshenko will win the presidential election, compared to 11% in 2017. Ten percent are confident in a victory by Petro Poroshenko, compared to 13% in 2017. About 3% consider a victory by Yurii Boiko likely. Fewer than 3% believe in a positive outcome for other candidates. Confidence in their favorites is expressed mainly by supporters of Yuliia Tymoshenko, Petro Poroshenko, and Oleksandr Shevchenko.
• Petro Poroshenko leads the anti-rating. Fifty-seven percent of respondents stated that they would not vote for him under any circumstances.
• In the party ratings, Batkivshchyna is the leader, supported by 21.2% of those who have decided and intend to vote. The Bloc Petro Poroshenko “Solidarity” is supported by 15.1%, the Radical Party by 12.9%, Civic Position by 9.6%, the Opposition Bloc by 9.1%, and Self Reliance and UKROP by 6.1% each. Other parties have ratings below 4%. One in three residents of the region does not intend to vote, and one in nine has not decided on a party choice.
• A candidate’s orientation toward closer cooperation with the European Union, cited by 83%, and the candidate’s socio-economic program, cited by 75%, are motives that have a significant influence on respondents’ presidential choice. For 52%, the candidate’s personal leadership qualities are important, while 46% indicate that the candidate’s team is more important. Fifty-two percent choose a candidate primarily based on experience in state politics, while for 43% affiliation with the group of “new politicians” is more important, especially among younger voters and supporters of Oleksandr Shevchenko, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, and Sviatoslav Vakarchuk. In addition, 53% focus on the candidate’s attention to their region, while 35% prioritize solving national problems. When choosing between radical change and ensuring stability, 54% prefer radical change, while 45% seek stability.
• Thirty-four percent of respondents expect that the situation in Ukraine will improve as a result of the upcoming presidential elections. Twenty-five percent believe the situation will not change, while 22% believe it will worsen. Supporters of Oleksandr Shevchenko, Yuliia Tymoshenko, and Petro Poroshenko are more likely than others to expect positive changes. Relatively fewer positive changes are expected by respondents who are undecided or do not intend to vote.
• According to respondents, the likelihood of electoral fraud in the presidential elections is higher at the national level, at 58%, than at the regional level, at 41%, or in their city or village, at 33%. Another 30–40% of respondents allow for the possibility of minor falsifications. Ten percent believe that there will be no fraud in their settlement.
• Only 5% of respondents have a positive attitude toward situations in which some politicians provide material assistance to voters during elections, while 32% take a neutral position. Fifty-seven percent oppose this form of campaigning. Residents of cities are somewhat more favorable toward the distribution of assistance.
• Residents of the region assess the performance of local authorities more positively than that of central authorities. Only 9–10% of respondents are satisfied with the performance of President Petro Poroshenko and Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, and only 6% are satisfied with the Verkhovna Rada. At the same time, more than 80% expressed dissatisfaction with the work of the central authorities.
• Over the year, satisfaction with the work of the regional state administration increased somewhat, from 22% to 27%, while satisfaction with the work of city or village heads increased noticeably, from 28% to 41%. Residents of smaller towns and villages in the region express the highest satisfaction with local authorities.
• About 60% believe that the situation with bribery has not changed at either the central or local level. Twenty-six percent observe an increase in corruption nationwide, while 13–17% observe it at the local level. A decrease in corruption at the national and regional levels was reported by about 11%, and at the level of their own city or village by 18%.
• The vast majority of respondents are dissatisfied with the situation in various spheres. The highest evaluations are given to safety and school education. The worst assessments concern ecology and forest preservation, as well as support for youth. Over the past year, improvement has been observed in the area of personal safety, while deterioration has been noted in school education, healthcare, the fight against corruption, and youth support. Other indicators have remained almost unchanged.
• Among opportunities in the region, respondents rated the ability to rest and spend leisure time the highest, and the opportunity to engage in entrepreneurship the lowest. All areas of opportunity are rated higher by urban residents and wealthier respondents. Safety is rated somewhat higher by middle-aged respondents, while the opportunity to find a job and engage in entrepreneurship is rated higher by middle-aged and older respondents.
• About 27% see high economic development potential for Ukraine over the next 5–10 years, while for the region and their own city or village this figure is 12–17%. About 50–60% assess the potential as moderate. At the national and regional levels, 15–17% see low potential, while at the level of their own settlement this figure reaches 23%. Only 1–2% see no opportunities for economic growth at all, either nationally or locally. Residents of small towns and middle-aged respondents assess growth potential more positively.
• The majority of respondents, at 70%, feel proud to be citizens of Ukraine, with the oldest respondents being slightly more likely to feel this way. Eighteen percent do not feel pride. Between 76% and 77% feel proud to be residents of their region and their city or village. Most often, respondents cite nature as the main source of pride in their region, at 51%. Thirty-five percent are proud of local traditions, 29% of regional culture and cuisine, 27% of history, 25% of local residents, and 10–12% of natural resources and landmarks.
• More than 60% consider themselves definitely or rather happy, while 27% hold the opposite view. Younger and wealthier respondents, as well as somewhat more rural residents, more often report personal happiness. At the same time, one in three urban residents and older respondents consider themselves unhappy, as do 40% of respondents from poorer groups.
• Residents of the region most often noted cultural and historical closeness to residents of neighboring Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, and Ternopil regions. Among neighboring countries, residents of the region consider themselves closest to Slovakia and Hungary.
• More than 20% expressed a desire to start their own business, while 9% reported that they are already entrepreneurs. About 40% stated that they do not have such aspirations. A slightly higher desire to start a business is observed among residents of small towns and villages, younger respondents, and wealthier respondents. Among those wishing to start a business, 23% indicated that they would like to engage in trade, while about 13–14% would prefer farming or tourism.
• Over the past year, the share of respondents wishing to work abroad decreased from 53% to 42%. Fifty-five percent of them are ready in the future to invest their earnings in starting a business in Ukraine, while 35% are not. Migration intentions are higher among youth, at 51%, rural residents, at 44%, and wealthier respondents, at 41–44%.
• Eighty-two percent believe that Ukrainian should be the only state language, while 10% support granting Russian official status in certain regions.
• The absolute majority of respondents, at 86%, consider Russia to be an aggressor country toward Ukraine. Only 2% hold the opposite view, while 12% are undecided.
• Support for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union remains high at 73%, although the share of those opposed to integration increased from 9% to 16%. Support for NATO membership decreased over the year from 67% to 61%, while the share of those opposed to NATO membership doubled from 10% to 20%. Among different directions of foreign economic integration, the pro-European vector leads at 72%, 21% support Ukraine maintaining equal distance from Russia and the West, and only 2% support accession to the Customs Union.