Measuring inclusive participation and beyond: the contribution of the World Values Survey to the SDGs monitoringK S E N I YA K I Z I L O VA

H E A D O F S E C R E TA R I AT AT T H E W O R L D VA L U E S

S U RV E Y A S S O C I AT I ON

V I C E - D I R E C TOR O F T H E I N S T I T U T E F O R C O M PA R AT I V E

S U RV E Y R E S E A R C H

V I E N N A , A U S T R I A

The World Values Survey (WVS) is a global cross-national cross-sectional research program exploring

human values and beliefs, their stability or change over time, and how they influence social, political and

economic development of societies around the globe.

Introduction to the World Values Survey

Largest non-commercial academic social survey program: covers 115 countries representing 92% of the world population

Time-series data for 38-years (1981-2019), over 700 indicators measured in this period

Over 15 000 publications, including academic articles and books, working papers, development reports

High-quality national-wide random representative samples (1200 to 6000 respondents per country); interviews in face to face mode

Collaboration of over 400 highly professional national survey teams worldwide

Free access to the data for researchers, civil society, international development agencies: www.worldvaluessurvey.org

World Values Survey geographic coverage (1981-2019): 115 countries

Some of the WVSA cooperation initiatives and partnerships (2014-2019)

Examples of global development reports that employ WVS data

SDG Target 16.5: Substantially reduce

corruption and bribery in all their forms

GERMANY

INDONESIA

AUSTRALIA JORDAN

THAILANDARGENTINAANDORRA

USA

BRAZILCHILE

SOUTH KOREA

RUSSIA

KAZAKHSTAN PUERTO RICO

GREECE

IRAQ

EGYPTMALAYSIA

LEBANONROMANIA

PAKISTANNIGERIA PERU

ECUADORSERBIA

BANGLADESH BOLIVIA

1.30

1.50

1.70

1.90

2.10

2.30

2.50

2.70

5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00

Fre

qu

ency

ord

inar

y p

eop

le p

ay a

bri

be

Perceived scale of corruption

Source: World Values Survey (2017-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

WVS data for the SDGs measurement

▪ WVS survey contains 200+ indicators valid for

monitoring SDGs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11,

13, 16, 17 as supplement measures.

▪ High quality samples: extrapolation of findings

on the total country adult population.

▪ Possibility of disaggregation by age, gender,

education, wellbeing, social class, migration

background, region of residence, type of

settlement.

▪ Possibility of cross-country and cross-

regional comparison for the same measures;

▪ All data in free access for individuals and

organizations (HEIs, IDAs, CSOs, NGOs etc.)

for any non-commercial purpose of use;

▪ Wide network of national research teams to

explore national context and engage with

CSO/NGO actors.

SDG Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere

Source: World Values Survey (2014-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

BRAZIL

CHILE MEXICO

SOUTH AFRICA

ARGENTINAPERU

PHILIPPINES

ALGERIAURUGUAY

ECUADORHAITI

COLOMBIAMALAYSIA

NIGERIAGREECE

ZIMBABWEBOLIVIA AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND

MOROCCOKAZAKHSTAN

TUNISIAINDIAUSARWANDALEBANON

PAKISTANKYRGYZSTAN IRAQTHAILAND

KUWAITRUSSIA GHANA

UKRAINEHONG KONG

YEMENSPAIN

SERBIA BELARUSTURKEY

SOUTH KOREA

ARMENIA SWEDENROMANIA JORDANJAPAN

CYPRUS

INDONESIA

LIBYA

ESTONIABANGLADESH

POLAND

NETHERLANDSEGYPT

GERMANYCHINA TAIWANSINGAPORE

SLOVENIA

AZERBAIJANQATAR

UZBEKISTANANDORRA

GEORGIA

2.25

2.45

2.65

2.85

3.05

3.25

3.45

3.65

3.85

2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80

FR

EQ

UE

NC

Y O

F R

OB

BE

RIE

S IN

TH

E N

EIG

HB

OU

RH

OO

D

PERCEIVED SECURITY IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD

SDG Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels

Algeria

Andorra

Argentina

Argentina

Armenia

Australia

Austria

Azerbaijan

Bangladesh

Belarus

Belgium

Bolivia

Brazil

Bulgaria

Canada

Chile

China

Colombia

Croatia

Cyprus

Czechia

Denmark

Ecuador

Egypt

Estonia

Ethiopia

Finland

FranceGeorgia Germany

Ghana

Greece

Guatemala

Hungary

IcelandIndia

Indonesia

Iran

Iraq

ItalyJapan

Kazakhstan

KuwaitKyrgyzstan

Lebanon

Libya

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Macedonia

Malaysia

Mali

Mexico

Moldova

Montenegro MoroccoNetherlands

New ZealandNigeria

NorwayPakistan

Peru

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Romania

RussiaRwanda

Serbia

Singapore

Slovakia

Slovenia

South AfricaSouth Korea

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

Taiwan

Tanzania

Thailand

Tunisia

Turkey

Uganda

UKUkraine

Uruguay

USA

Yemen

Zambia

Zimbabwe

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40

CO

NF

IDE

NC

E IN

CIV

IL S

ER

VIC

E

CONFIDENCE IN POLICE

Source: World Values Survey (2014-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

Pilot of tier III indicator 16.7.2: Proportion

of population who believe

decision-making is inclusive and

responsive, by population group

How much would you say the political system in your country allows

people like you to have a say in what the government does?

(“a great deal” + “a lot” in %)

89.8%

83.6%

74.0%

73.5%

71.1%

71.0%

70.8%

69.7%

69.3%

68.0%

67.4%

66.7%

63.9%

63.9%

63.8%

63.1%

61.9%

54.6%

Italy

Slovenia

Estonia

Argentina

Russia

Lithuania

Spain

Poland

Israel

France

Ireland

Hungary

Portugal

Austria

Finland

Belgium

Czechia

UK

53.1%

50.1%

49.6%

46.4%

46.2%

43.5%

41.5%

41.5%

41.2%

33.8%

31.4%

29.6%

25.6%

25.1%

18.3%

17.9%

15.5%

Sweden

Iceland

Germany

Netherlands

Andorra

Malaysia

Pakistan

Jordan

Indonesia

Nigeria

Norway

Iraq

Switzerland

Lebanon

Australia

Brazil

Egypt

Source: World Values Survey (2017-2019); European Social Survey 8 (2016)

▪ Implemented as a part of cooperation

agreement between the UNDP and the

WVSA.

▪ Pilot of the measure on inclusive and

responsive decision-making in 2018-2020

conducted in 40 countries.

▪ In every country representative national

samples are interviewed; item translated so

far into 17 languages.

▪ Data collected via face-to-face interview

method (PAPI; CAPI modes).

▪ Possibility of data disaggregation by

population group and location.

▪ Study of correlations with measures of

democracy, voting and other forms of political

participation, confidence in institutions etc.

Proportion of adult population in Bangladesh who believe

decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by population

groups and region (%)

Source: World Values Survey in Bangladesh (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

53.70%

45.80%

49.10%

51.70%

47.50%

43.80%

58.70%

56.40%

50.10%

42.30%

46.50%

50.70%

Males

Females

18-29 years

30-45 years

46-99 years

Primary, secondaryeducation

Tertiary education

Low income

Medium income

High income

Urban

Rural

Proportion of adult population in Malaysia who believe decision-making is

inclusive and responsive, by population groups and regions (%)

42.50% 46.50% 45.50% 46.50%37.10%

46.30%31.10%

45.80% 43.40% 36.80% 34.30%

59.10%

Males Females 18-29years

30-49years

50 andolder

Primary,secondaryeducation

Tertiaryeducation

Lowincome

Mediumincome

Highincome

Urban Rural

Source: World Values Survey in Malaysia (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

Proportion of adult population in Pakistan who believe

decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by population

groups and regions (%)

41.60%

41.30%

47.80%

40.50%

39.10%

40.30%

45.70%

38.80%

41.80%

48.40%

43.70%

40.40%

Males

Females

18-25 years

26-40 years

41-99 years

Primary, secondaryeducation

Tertiary education

Low income

Medium income

High income

Urban

Rural

Source: World Values Survey in Pakistan (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

64.1

28.5 26.1 24.9 18.3 17.1

60.7

25.7 28.0 22.2 21.3 13.6

61.1

29.2 26.7 25.7 25.914.0

Voted in lastelections

Donated to a groupor campaign

Searchedinformation about

politics online

Encouraged othersto vote

Signed a petition Contacted agovernment official

Political system responsiveness:

Very much or a lot Some Little or no

13.5 11.5 11.3 8.6 6.3 6.010.6 14.2 9.0 6.8 3.8 6.014.7 14.4 11.2 10.1 3.7 7.0

Attended peacefuldemonstration

Signed an e-petition Encouraged othersto take an action

about political issue

Joined a strike Organized a event,protest using social

media

Joined in boycott

Perceptions of inclusive and responsive decision-making and reported forms of political

participation and civil activity (%)

Source: World Values Survey (2017-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org

Key methodological findings from the pilot

Variation in interpretation of “having a say” which affects the translation and the overall question meaning in other languages => remark for translators required;

In most languages, very close distance between scale positions 1=Very much; 2=A lot => difficulty to reproduce the required difference between the two points;

Item is a valid measure of external efficacy, responses correlate highly with the perceived satisfaction with democracy and the way political system is developing in the country, confidence in the government;

Question was possible to ask in all countries regardless of the type of political regime, in less democratic countries the respondents more often tend to select “hard to say” or “refuse to answer” (up to 20%) => consider developing supplementary measures.

Next steps: short-term and long-termContinue cooperation with UNDP and OGC on piloting SDG 16.7.2 in 2019-2020;

Complete the pilot in 40 countries by July 2020;

Submit the findings and methodological remarks for the further question polishing/ reclassification of the indicator from tier III to tier II;

Explore possibilities to engage with other international development and civil society organizations who can benefit from the newly collected data both at global, regional and national basis;

Expand further the number of SDG measures in the WVS questionnaire, in particular –for the next WVS-8 round (2022-2025);

Explore possibilities of combining survey activity with additional actions, events engaging local communities, CSOs and policy-makers in the studied countries.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!

WEB: WWW.WORLDVALUESSURVEY.ORG

MAIL: WVSA.SECRETARIAT@GMAIL.COM

FACEBOOK: WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/WORLDVALUESSURVEY

TWITTER: TWITTER.COM/VALUESSTUDIES

Kseniya Kizilova

Head of the WVSA Secretariat

ksenniya.kizilova@gmail.com