The Evolving State of Russian Civil Society...2015/02/02 · The import-dependent model: –economic collapse and anomie, – import of ideas, institutions and resources for civil

The Evolving State of Russian Civil Society

Lev Jakobson International Laboratory for Nonprofit Studies

Center for Studies of Civil Society and Nonprofit Sector National Research University “Higher School of Economics”

Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2014

www.hse.ru

1


photo

photo

2

Civil Society Monitoring

(since 2006, funded by NRU HSE)

The «core» of the monitoring: volunteerism, charity, the formation of Third Sector and the position of NPOs + various issue-based studies

Representative population surveys (2000 respondents, 41 500 respondents)

All-Russia surveys of NGOs (1005 leaders and CEOs)

Mass-media and other sources

2 Higher School of Economics , Moscow, 2013


photo

photo

3

The changing models

The latent growth model (“snowdrops”) – since “the thaw” till “perestroika”

The import-dependent model:

– economic collapse and anomie,

– import of ideas, institutions and resources for civil society development (1997: NGOs’ contribution to GDP - $66 million, the budget of the USAID office in Russia – $173 million, the Soros’s donation for Russia - $33 million)

The rooted model:

– fairly rapid economic growth,

– the modern middle class – about 20 per cent of the population,

– domestic sources of development,

– the third sector as “a mirror” of the society (rather than its “mentor”)


Высшая школа экономики, Москва, 2011

фото

фото

фото

Характерные черты институциональной среды

и устойчивости организаций третьего сектора

Санкт-Петербурга

4

2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 8 9 9 13 15

18 24

41 25

40 23

31 21

27 28

45 30

21 31

15 24

39 61

24 37

47 42

60 63

61 61

51 40

44 52

49 46

47 46

47 48

41 47

44 41

43 45

42 27

44 44

38 40

28 25

23 22

30 34

13 21

9 29

20 30

23 21

11 19

31 24

38 27

14 7

28 13

9 9

4 3 3 2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Portugal

Cyprus

Belgium

France

Spain

Greece

Croatia

Slovenia

Poland

Hungary

United Kingdom

Germany

Slovakia

Czech Republic

Bulgaria

Ukraine

Ireland

Netherlands

Russia

Israel

Switzerland

Estonia

Sweden

Finland

Norway

Denmark

Most people can be trusted You’d rather be careful dealing with other people

Most people are likely to be trusted You should be careful dealing with other people

Most people can be trusted or you should be

careful dealing with other people?

EVS, 2012



фото

фото

фото




5

1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 8 9

20 14

19 23

18 33

12 32

26 28

53 28

19 21

32 35

55 51

30 46

24 36

45 55 55 55

48 41

48 41 55

52 45

52 52

45 38

45 48

48 52 45

35 39

47 41

43 45

40 34 33 33

31 44

31 33

25 13

40 13

19 24

6 24

30 27

12 16

6 6

18 8

28 13

8 3 4 4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CyprusGreecePolandCroatia

PortugalBelgiumBulgaria

SpainFrance

Czech RepublicNetherlands

SloveniaUkraineSlovakia

GermanyIsrael

FinlandUnited Kingdom

HungarySwitzerland

RussiaEstoniaIreland

NorwaySweden

Denmark

People are often likely to help each other People are rather likely to help each other

People are rather likely to care only about themselves People are often likely to care only about themselves

Do people usually help each other or

care only about themselves?

EVS, 2012



photo

photo

6

Community engagement in charitable activities

6

16

4

71

3 Scores of times

Several times

One time

Don’t do it

Do not know

During the last year have you volunteered for the benefit of other people who are not your family or

relatives? If yes, how often did you volunteer?

During the last year, have you made any charitable donations, given money to people who is in need and whom you don't know personally (including

beggars)? If yes, then how often?

11

30

5

51

3

6



photo

photo

7

During the last year besides working at my job I have volunteered for the benefit of other people



photo

photo

8

Activities

Distribution of answers for the question:

Which of these activities did you perform last year? (Card, any number of responses)

among

nonparticipants of NPO

among participants

of NPO

among leaders of NPO

participated in public campaigns in support of people in difficult situation

5 21 37

participated in community efforts on the improvement of your house, courtyard, city (village, settlement)

27 53 45

participated in meetings of the residents of a building 18 35 31

assembled a team to address your own or someone else's problem

5 15 35

petitioned governmental institutions on a personal issue 6 16 32



photo

photo

9

Political sympathies and activism

Heterogeneous society

Political sympathies of the population (August 2013): liberal views – 9%, social-democratic views – 34%, communist – 16%, in favor of a “strong hand” – 17%

Political sympathies of NGOs leaders: liberal values – 20%, social democratic values – 16%, conservative – 11%, communist – 5%, nationalist – 3%, neutral – 40%

Sympathy for nationalism are growing rapidly, especially among youth

2011-2012: protesters were about 1 % of Muscovites, much less in other largest cities

18% NGO leaders were involved in political events (pro- and antigovernment demonstrations etc.). Sympathizers of communism much more than any other

“If there is a change of political regime in the country in the near future, will it be favorable for organizations like yours?”: “Yes” – 4%, “Probably yes” – 12%, “Probably not” – 26%, “Not” – 12%



фото

фото

фото




10

Signed petition last 12 months

3 3

5 6 6 6

7 8

9 11

13 14

16 21 21

22 26 26

28 28

29 29

30 32

36 37

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Ukraine

Hungary

Greece

Portugal

Russia

Bulgaria

Cyprus

Estonia

Slovenia

Poland

Israel

Ireland

Czech Republic

Belgium

Slovakia

Croatia

Netherlands

Spain

Finland

United Kingdom

France

Denmark

Germany

Switzerland

Norway

Sweden

EVS, 2012



фото

фото

фото




11

Worked in a political party or action group

last 12 months

2 2

2 2

2 3 3 3

3 3 3

3 3 3 4 4 4 4

4 4

4 5

5 6 6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

United Kingdom

Portugal

Slovakia

Poland

Czech Republic

Hungary

Israel

Bulgaria

Greece

Slovenia

Ireland

France

Finland

Estonia

Croatia

Sweden

Netherlands

Ukraine

Germany

Denmark

Cyprus

Belgium

Russia

Switzerland

Norway

Spain

EVS, 2012



фото

фото

фото




12

Worked in another organization or association

last 12 months

1 1 2

4 4 4 5 5

6 6 6 6 7 7 8

8 14

16 18

20 24

25 26

28 29

39

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Bulgaria

Ukraine

Slovenia

Israel

Portugal

Russia

Greece

Croatia

Estonia

Slovakia

United Kingdom

Cyprus

Hungary

Poland

Czech Republic

Ireland

Switzerland

France

Spain

Belgium

Netherlands

Denmark

Germany

Sweden

Norway

Finland

EVS, 2012


Nonprofit organizations

photo

photo

■ In accordance with the Russian legislation, a nonprofit organization (NPO) is an organization established for purposes other than income generation

■ Socially oriented NGOs (SO NGOs)

■ More than 430,000 officially registered NPOs (state/municipal organizations not included)

■ Actually working are about 40 per cent of those officially registered

■ About % of economically active population work in nonprofit sector

■ General level of involvement in voluntary work in nonprofit sector was 3.02% of

the economically active population (3.2% of the employed population).



photo

photo

14

Volunteers in NGOs

■ More than 75% of Russian NGOs use volunteers’ labour to different extent.

■ General level of involvement in voluntary work in nonprofit sector was 3.02% of the economically active population (3.2% of the employed population) in 2008.

■ Involvement of Russian people in formal volunteering depends on age, level of education, income, place of residence.

■ On average volunteers work 26 hours per month in Russian NGOs.

■ In terms of full employment volunteer labour force constitutes 0.42% of the economically active population or 0.44% of the economically employed population.

■ If the work of volunteers was remunerated at the same level as the work of hired employees of NGOs, then the cost of voluntary work would be RUB 16.4 billion

(US$ 542 million) annually.



photo

photo

15

Percentage of volunteers in nonprofit sector*

0,44

1,3 1,5 1,8

2,3 2,4 2,4 2,7

3 3 3 3,1 3,1 3,1 3,2 3,9

4,5

5,6 5,8 5,8 6,4

7

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Ru

ssia

Isra

el

Spai

n

Ital

y

Irel

and

Ch

ile

Be

lgiu

m

Arg

enti

na

Ger

man

y

Au

stra

lia

USA

Fin

lan

d

Fran

ce

Jap

an

Can

ada

Den

mar

k

No

rway

Au

stri

a

Gre

at B

rita

in

The

Net

her

lan

ds

New

Zea

lan

d

Swed

en

*Data by the Center for Civil Society Studies, John’s Hopkins University in frames of Comparative

Non-profit Sector Project.

15



photo

photo

16

NGOs: main fields of activity

(per cent)

3

1

1

2

2

4

5

11

14

17

17

22

0 10 20 30

Others

Religion

International activities

Public health

Environment

Education and research

Philanthropy

Development and housing

Professional associations. Unions

Civil rights advocacy and other public activity

Culture and recreation

Social services

16



photo

photo

17


«Number of permanent staff employees

in 2012»

Staff employees and volunteers

2

34

4

13

13

19

15

0 20 40

difficult toanswer

no permanentemployees

31 and more

11-30 persons

6-10 persons

3-5 persons

1-2 persons


«On the average, how many volunteers work for

your organization every month? (all NPOs)»

8

31

13

12

16

20

0 20 40

difficult toanswer

no volunteers

50 persons andmore

20-49 persons

10-19 persons

1-9 persons



photo

photo

18

Distribution of answers for the question: «What sources of funding does your organization have?»

(per cent of respondents)

Sources of NGO funding

1

4

6

3

35

19

1

11

4

16

10

2

10

19

21

17

41

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

difficult to answer

other

none

funding from local communities' foundations (local grant making istitutions)

voluntary contributions and donations from the private individuals

donations from Russian business companies

funding from foreign business companies

grants from Russian foundations, transfers from the other Russian NPOs

grants or technical assistance from foreign NPOs, international organizations…

local government funding (municipal / local budgets)

regional government funding (budgets of the subjects of the federation)

government funding from federal extrabudgetary funds (funds of the social…

government funding (federal budget, including "presidential" grants, subsidies…

personal contributions from members, employees, founders, other than fees

income from sales of goods and services

contributions from founders or owners

membership fees



photo

photo

19

Distribution of answers for the question: «How do you assess the economical situation

of your organization today?»

Economic situation of NGOs

6

13

9

4

16

3

28

21

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

difficult to answer

insufficiency of funding threatens the existence of the organization, wework on pure enthusiasm

to keep the organization going, too much effort goes into fundraising tothe detriments of core activity

the organization has to put up with low-skilled employees because ofinsufficient funding

there's enough funds to pay employees of suitable skills, but not enoughacquire (renovate) decent fixed assets

there is enough funds to accumulate financial reserves

there's enough funds to implement all core activities, but many newideas have to be set back because of insufficient resources

generally, there's enough resources to implement all plans



photo

photo

20

Do people pin their hopes on NGOs?

■ 76% of the population wanted NGOs to participate actively in resolution of social problems

■ Only 33% of citizens assess this participation more or less satisfactory

■ “Are NGOs able to influence the social conflicts? Is their influence principally positive or negative?”

• “Their influence can not be significant” – 14%

• “They are able to foment conflicts in the main” – 8%

• “They are able to prevent and mitigate conflicts in the main” – 21%

• “Their influence is ambivalent” – 31%

• Undecided – 27%



photo

photo

21 Высшая школа экономики, Москва, 2011

фото

фото

фото




21

Attract voluntary donations into the branch

Replies to the question: “How could non-profit organizations

and civic initiatives help improve the situation

in the social sphere?” (in percent)

Attract voluntary labour

Inform population on services quality

Control authorities’ work

Protect the rights of...

Actively work in the social sphere

21

25

23

22

18 20 22 24 26

Social security

Culture

Education

Public health

34

17

11

15

0 10 20 30 40

Social security

Culture

Education

Public health

36

32

39

36

0 20 40 60

Social…

Culture

Education

Public health

41

49

35 40 45 50

Students

Patients

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

To get engaged in the sphere of public health, render medical services to the…

To get engaged in the sphere of education, render educational services to the…

To get engaged in the sphere of culture, render services to the people

identify the real needs of vulnerable social groups and inform the authorities on it

37

23

17

21

0 10 20 30 40

Social security

Culture

Education

Public health

21



фото

фото

фото

Характерные черты институциональной среды и устойчивости организаций третьего сектора Санкт-Петербурга

22

Distribution of answers to the question: «What attitude toward authorities, in your opinion, do most public associations and other NPOs, civic initiatives currently have? » (% of respondents)

NGO attitude toward authorities

10

0

1

14

15

17

27

32

36

2

1

16

8

15

12

26

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

difficult to answer

other

Inhibit the work of authorities

Use the authorities to solve own problems

Assist authorities in their activies and undertakings

Protect citizens interests vis-a-vis authorities

Jointly with authorities develop and implement sociallyimportant programs

Mind their own business, avoiding unnecessarycontacts with authorities

All population NPO



фото

фото

фото


23

Distribution of answers to the question: «What attitude, in your opinion, does the government currently have towards public associations, other NPOs and civic initiatives? » (% of respondents)

Government’s actual attitude toward NPOs


2

5

5

17

20

24

24

35

1

7

36

12

13

16

20

15

0 10 20 30 40

Other

Try to abolish independent initiatives, non-governmental, non-profit organizations

difficult to answer

Encourage their development

Establish cooperation with them as with equalpartners

Be indifferent, ignore them

Try to establish control over them

Try to assist and cooperate, but unsuccessfully

All population NPO


фото

фото

фото


24

Distribution of answers to the question: «And what attitude, in your opinion, SHOULD have the

government currently towards public associations, other NPOs and civic initiatives? » (% of respondents)

Government’s desirable attitude toward NPOs


0

0

1

1

5

55

59

60

2

1

0

12

21

48

35

34

0 20 40 60

Seek to eradicate independent initiatives,…

Be indifferent, ignore them

Other

difficult to answer

Control them

Assist and cooperate

Establishe cooperation with them as with…

Encourage their development

All population NPO


фото

фото

фото


25

Distribution of answers to the question: «How does state support influence

civil society's development in our country?»

18

37

24

8

13

certainly significantly

rather significantly

rather insignificantly

no influence

difficult to answer

Impact of government support

on civil society development



фото

фото

фото


26

In your opinion, what has the greatest influence on the chances of such organizations as

yours to receive state support (e.g. a government grant or a subsidy)

to implement a socially significant project?

Factors enhancing possibility of state support

8

2

1

4

6

13

15

18

20

32

33

34

35

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

difficult to answer

other

promice to continue the supported activity after the finishing project

delivery in oblegations to provide co-funding for the project

nothing has an influence

positive project implementation track record

a realistic project budget estimate

good relations with authorities

сonnections with people who can influence the allocation of funds

topicality and social significance of the project

a detailed project proposal

organizations public profile and reputation

well difined, significant and achivable results



фото

фото

фото


27

Distribution of answers to the question: «What can you say, generally,

about the legislative regulation of NPOs' activity in our country?»

5

34

40

8

13

imposes strong barriers, providesno opportunities

imposes barriers mainly, leavessmall opportunities

imposes no major barriers, leavescertain opportunities

imposes no barriers at all, gives allopportunities

difficult to answer

Quality of NPO regulatory environment


http://grans.hse.ru

Documents

The Evolving State of Russian Civil Society...2015/02/02 · The import-dependent model: –economic collapse and anomie, – import of ideas, institutions and resources for civil