sign in sign up
<<
Home , Interview, Interview (research), Survey (human research), World Values Survey

Measuring inclusive participation and beyond: the contribution of the World Values to the SDGs monitoring

KSENIYA KIZILOVA HEAD OF SECRETARIAT AT THE ASSOCIATION VICE - DIRECTOR OF THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPARATIVE SURVEY VIENNA, AUSTRIA Introduction to the World Values Survey

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 of around the globe.

Largest non-commercial academic High-quality national-wide random social survey program: covers 115 representative samples (1200 to countries representing 92% of the 6000 respondents per country); world population in face to face mode

Time-series data for 38-years (1981- Collaboration of over 400 highly 2019), over 700 indicators professional national survey teams measured in this period worldwide

Free access to the data for Over 15 000 publications, including researchers, civil , academic articles and books, working international development agencies: papers, development reports 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 WVS data for the SDGs measurement SDG Target 16.5: Substantially reduce ▪ WVS survey contains 200+ indicators valid for corruption and bribery in all their forms monitoring SDGs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 2.70 13, 16, 17 as supplement measures. BANGLADESH BOLIVIA SERBIA ECUADOR ▪ High quality samples: extrapolation of findings 2.50 PAKISTAN NIGERIA PERU on the total country population. ROMANIA IRAQ 2.30 MALAYSIA ▪ Possibility of disaggregation by age, gender, EGYPT GREECE education, wellbeing, social class, migration SOUTH background, region of residence, type of 2.10 KAZAKHSTAN PUERTO RICO KOREA RUSSIA settlement. CHILE BRAZIL 1.90 USA ▪ Possibility of cross-country and cross- ANDORRA ARGENTINA regional comparison for the same measures; THAILAND 1.70 ▪ All data in free access for individuals and JORDAN

organizations (HEIs, IDAs, CSOs, NGOs etc.) 1.50 for any non-commercial purpose of use; Frequency ordinary people pay bribe a

1.30 ▪ Wide network of national research teams to 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00 8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00 explore national context and engage with Perceived scale of corruption CSO/NGO actors.

Source: World Values Survey (2017-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org SDG Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere

3.85 GEORGIA UZBEKISTAN AZERBAIJAN ANDORRA SINGAPORE GERMANY TAIWAN QATAR 3.65 POLAND SLOVENIA EGYPT CYPRUS BANGLADESH SOUTH KOREA ESTONIA 3.45 ROMANIA INDONESIA JORDAN ARMENIA SERBIA BELARUS LIBYA RUSSIA TURKEY GHANA YEMEN 3.25 UKRAINE KUWAIT KYRGYZSTAN THAILAND HONG KONG IRAQ PAKISTAN 3.05 KAZAKHSTAN LEBANON RWANDA USA MOROCCO INDIA TUNISIA GREECE NEW ZEALAND NIGERIA AUSTRALIA 2.85 BOLIVIA ZIMBABWE MALAYSIA COLOMBIA HAITI ECUADOR 2.65 ALGERIA PERU URUGUAY ARGENTINA PHILIPPINES MEXICO 2.45 CHILE SOUTH

FREQUENCY OF ROBBERIES IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD THE INROBBERIES OF FREQUENCY BRAZIL

2.25 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 PERCEIVED SECURITY IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD

Source: World Values Survey (2014-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org SDG Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent at all levels

3.00 Bangladesh Uganda Indonesia China Singapore Ghana Kazakhstan Tanzania 2.80 India Mali Luxembourg Switzerland Thailand Philippines Iceland Azerbaijan Rwanda Estonia Kuwait Denmark Kyrgyzstan Germany Russia Georgia Malaysia France Sweden Turkey 2.60 Taiwan Austria Pakistan Belgium Norway South Korea Zimbabwe Netherlands Canada Argentina Montenegro Slovakia South Africa MacedoniaSpain Morocco Andorra New Zealand 2.40 Nigeria Moldova Zambia Cyprus Libya Portugal Australia Finland Brazil UK Ukraine Hungary Poland Iran Greece Lithuania Algeria USA Italy 2.20 Ethiopia Japan Armenia Chile Czechia Belarus Tunisia Bulgaria Croatia 2.00 Iraq Slovenia Serbia Romania Egypt Uruguay Argentina

CONFIDENCE IN CIVIL CONFIDENCESERVICE IN CIVIL 1.80 Bolivia Mexico Colombia Yemen Lebanon Guatemala Ecuador 1.60

Peru 1.40 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 CONFIDENCE IN POLICE

Source: World Values Survey (2014-2019); www.worldvaluessurvey.org Pilot of tier III indicator 16.7.2: Proportion How much would you say the political system in your country allows of population who believe people like you to have a say in what the does? decision-making is inclusive and (“a great deal” + “a lot” in %) responsive, by population group Italy 89.8% 15.5% Egypt Slovenia ▪ Implemented as a part of cooperation 83.6% 17.9% Brazil agreement between the UNDP and the Estonia 74.0% 18.3% Australia WVSA. Argentina 73.5% 25.1% Lebanon Russia ▪ Pilot of the measure on inclusive and 71.1% 25.6% Switzerland responsive decision-making in 2018-2020 Lithuania 71.0% 29.6% Iraq conducted in 40 countries. Spain 70.8% 31.4% Norway ▪ In every country representative national Poland 69.7% 33.8% Nigeria samples are interviewed; item translated so Israel 69.3% 41.2% Indonesia far into 17 languages. France 68.0% 41.5% Jordan ▪ Data collected via face-to-face Ireland 67.4% 41.5% Pakistan method (PAPI; CAPI modes). Hungary 66.7% 43.5% Malaysia Portugal 63.9% ▪ Possibility of data disaggregation by 46.2% Andorra population group and location. Austria 63.9% 46.4% Netherlands Finland 63.8% Germany ▪ Study of correlations with measures of 49.6% Belgium , voting and other forms of political 63.1% 50.1% Iceland participation, confidence in institutions etc. Czechia 61.9% 53.1% Sweden UK 54.6%

Source: World Values Survey (2017-2019); 8 (2016) Proportion of adult population in Bangladesh who believe Males 53.70% decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by population Females 45.80% groups and region (%)

18-29 years 49.10%

30-45 years 51.70%

46-99 years 47.50% Primary, secondary 43.80% education Tertiary education 58.70%

Low income 56.40%

Medium income 50.10%

High income 42.30%

Urban 46.50%

Rural 50.70%

Source: World Values Survey in Bangladesh (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org Proportion of adult population in Malaysia who believe decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by population groups and regions (%) 59.10% 42.50% 46.50% 45.50% 46.50% 46.30% 45.80% 43.40% 37.10% 31.10% 36.80% 34.30%

Males Females 18-29 30-49 50 and Primary, Tertiary Low Medium High Urban Rural years years older secondary education income income income education

Source: World Values Survey in Malaysia (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org Proportion of adult population in Pakistan who believe Males 41.60% decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by population Females 41.30% groups and regions (%)

18-25 years 47.80%

26-40 years 40.50%

41-99 years 39.10% Primary, secondary 40.30% education Tertiary education 45.70%

Low income 38.80%

Medium income 41.80%

High income 48.40%

Urban 43.70%

Rural 40.40%

Source: World Values Survey in Pakistan (2018); www.worldvaluessurvey.org Perceptions of inclusive and responsive decision-making and reported forms of political participation and civil activity (%) Political system responsiveness: Very much or a lot Some Little or no 64.1 60.7 61.1 28.5 25.7 29.2 26.1 28.0 26.7 24.9 25.7 25.9 22.2 18.3 21.3 17.1 13.6 14.0

Voted in last Donated to a group Searched Encouraged others Signed a petition Contacted a elections or campaign about to vote government official online

13.5 14.7 14.2 14.4 10.6 11.5 11.3 9.0 11.2 8.6 6.8 10.1 6.3 3.8 3.7 6.0 6.0 7.0

Attended peaceful Signed an e-petition Encouraged others Joined a strike Organized a event, Joined in boycott demonstration to take an action protest using social about political issue media

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-term Continue 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 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 , 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: [email protected] FACEBOOK: WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/WORLDVALUESSURVEY TWITTER: TWITTER.COM/VALUESSTUDIES

Kseniya Kizilova Head of the WVSA Secretariat [email protected]