Trust Responsibility for Societal Issues and Charity in Macedonia

8/9/2019 Trust Responsibility for Societal Issues and Charity in Macedonia

1/82


2/82

publiher

Macedonian Center for International Cooperation

for the ubliher

Saso Klekovski

Executive Director

author

Saso KlekovskiAleksandar KrzalovskiSuncica SazdovskaGonce Jakovleska

secretry

Daniela Stojanova

deign n prere

Koma lab. Skopje

skoje, setember 2006

CIP Katalogizacija vo publikacijaNacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka Sv. Kliment Ohridski,Skopje

316.653:061.2(497.7)

Trust Responsibility for Societal Issues and Charity in Macedonia ; (elektronskiizvor); ( / (authors Saso Klekovski... id r.), - Skopje : Macedonian Center for Interna-tional Cooperation, 2006Na~in na pristap (URL): www.mcm.org.mk

ISBN 9989-102-37-6

a) Javno mislewe Makedonija Nevladini organizacii

COBISS.MK ID 67373578


3/82

CONENS

PREFACE 7

LIS OF ABBREVIAIONS 9

EXECUIVE SUMMARY 11

I. INRODUCION 15

II. RUS 19

III. RUS AND AIUDES

ON CIVIL SOCIEY 27

IV. UNDERSANDING AND AIUDES

ON CIVIL SOCIEY ORGANIZAIONS 33

V. RESPONSIBILIY FOR SOCIEAL ISSUES 43

VI. CHARIY 49

APPENDIX 1.

QUESIONNAIRES 67

APPENDIX 2.

SAMPLE SRUCURE 81


4/82


5/82


6/82

With this, the civil society sector puts amid expectations the business sectorand citizens. Do citizens have similar perception over who is responsible orresolving societal issues?

Tis is why MCIC wanted to examine the degree o trust and charity o citizens.

Te data and analyses presented in this report enable more realistic utureplanning. But, this is not all. We hope that this report will open discussions anddebates on trust, responsibility or societal issues and charity in Macedonia.

Saso KlekovskiExecutive Director


7/82

LIS OF ABBREVIAIONS

ADI: Association o Democratic Initiatives

VMRODPMNE: Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization Democratic

Party or Macedonian National Unity

VMRONP: Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization Peoples Party

DEM: he Ecologists Movements o Macedonia

DOM: Democratic Renewal o Macedonia

DPA: Democratic Party o AlbaniansDUI: Democratic Union o Integration

ESE: Association o Equality, Solidarity and Emancipation

ZIOM: Union o Organizations o Invalids o Macedonia

AJM: Association o Journalists o Macedonia

ZELS: Association o the Units o the Local SelGovernment

ISPPI: Institute o Sociological, Juridical and Political Research

ISC: Institute o Sustainable Communities

MEDF: Development ne Developmental

MCK: Macedonian Red Cross

MCIC: Macedonian Centre o International Cooperation

NSDP: New SocialDemocratic Party

OPM: Organization o Consumers o Macedonia

PDP: Party or Democratic Prosperity

SDSM: SocialDemocratic Union o Macedonia

SZPM: Union o Associations o Pensioners o Macedonia

SSUKM: Union o Students within Ss. Kiril and Metodij University

SOZM: Union o Womens Organizations in Republic o Macedonia

FOSIM: Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia

HCHR: Helsinki Committee o Human Rights o Republic o Macedonia

CID: Centre o Institutional Development

CGI: Centre o Civic Initiative


8/82


9/82

EXECUIVE SUMMARY

Te report rust, Responsibility or Societal Issues and Charity in Macedoniaresulted rom the need to examine the degree o trust o citizens in civil societyorganizations and to check the citizens willingness o giving. Te report goes astep urther, giving a broad overview o trust and charity, including the other two

sectors, state and business. Furthermore, it provides insight in the citizens attitudeson all three sectors, insight in the attitudes on responsibility or substantialsocietal issues, the motives behind giving etc. Numerous variables (gender, age,ethnical belonging, education, place o residence, region, employment status,monthly income per member o household and political inclination) made itpossible to see how the attitudes and statements correlate with social indicators,ethnical belonging or region o residence. Tis has contributed to create a proleo citizen on specic issue that acilitated the urther analysis. Te report willpresent several such proles.

Te surveying o representative sample was selected as suitable methodology orexamining the trust and charity.

RUS

Te general trust and trust in institutions in Macedonia is relatively low (54.5%).Te report presents the correlation between general trust and social indicators i.e.showing that the trust is higher among citizens with higher education, employedand higher monthly income, and vice versa. Tere is impressing higher trust onmicro and local level, in comparison with large and national institutions. Telowest is the trust in political parties and politicallyrelated institutions. On theother hand, the trust in institutions in correlation with age and ethnical belongingshows that the younger (1830) and ethnic Albanians have higher trust in newinstitutions, such as the business sector, while those above 65 have low trust ininstitutions.


10/82

10

Regarding the trust in civil society organizations, the citizens are divided (50,3%have trust, while 49,7% do not). Considering the attitudes, to whom the civilsociety serves, large majority o citizens say they partially/ully agree with theattitude that civil society organizations serve to the citizens (76,7%), in contrast

to 55,1% which partially/ully agree with the attitude that the civil societyorganizations serve the interests o oreign countries and oundations. Tecitizens consider the civil society organizations to be nonpartisan, but abusedby the parties.

Te general understanding o civil society organizations is good, large majority(67,2%) o citizens can state certain civil society organizations. Te citizens arear less amiliar with the work o civil society organizations in specic areas.Tis knowledge is correlated with social indicators. Tose amiliar with the civil

society are members o the middle class i.e. more educated, live in the towns, areemployed in the public sector, have higher monthly income and in average areyounger. Tere is correlation between amiliarity with civil society organizationsand their prole, activities and their presence in the public. Finally, the publichas positive opinion o the civil society organizations.

RESPONSIBILIY FOR SOCIEAL ISSUES

Te citizens perceive the state as most responsible or responding to the societalneeds, with lower expectations rom the citizens themselves and almost noexpectations rom the business community.

Selshness is highly perceived among the others, while only 26.4% believe insolidarity. Citizens think the social assistance is not a solution or the problems,but the employment. On the other hand, they are willing to give in the area,classied as social welare.

ChARIY

Although a large number o people give (83,2% o the citizens have givensomething at least once in the past 12 months), only small percentage givesregularly. Te report asserted that citizens mainly give or health, children, youthand persons with special needs and they mostly give money. Te usual amountis rom 10 to 100 MKD, which represents a decline in comparison with the usualsum o money given in 2001, amounting between 100 and 500 MKD.


11/82

11

Te act that trust is o crucial importance or charity is conrmed by the numbero 42,6% rom surveyed citizens who think that the unds are not used or thepurpose they were earmarked. In order to increase the trust, it is necessary toprovide better inormation on using the assistance.

Te citizens mostly want to give directly and on hand. Te reasons or directgiving lie in the act o avoiding abuse (31,1%) and the desire to see to whomthe assistance is given (26,6%). Tis is contrary to the attitude o 17,9% o therespondents who expect to get eedback on how the assistance was used.

.........................................

Te 1991 Constitution denes Macedonia as liberaldemocratic state. TeLiberalDemocratic concept, among the others, includes shared responsibilityamong three sectors state, business and civic, high level o social capital (basedon high general trust, acceptance o cultural diversity) and civic responsibility(including the participation in charitable activities).

Te research covered some o the sociocultural indicators, but maybe not alland not suciently, o sociocultural transition rom authoritarian and etatistic(socialist) culture towards liberaldemocratic values.

Te indicators such as the relatively low general trust and trust in institutions,particularly the new ones, high expectations rom the state in resolving thesocietal needs, low level o civic responsibility, bring to a preliminary conclusionthat aer een years o transition, authoritarian and etatistic culture has beendeeply rooted among the majority o Macedonias citizens, especially among the(possible) victims o transition (less educated, unemployed, with low income).Certainly, it is important that employment has higher priority than socialhumanitarian assistance, but there is a risk o growing expectations that this is

also responsibility o the state.


12/82

1


13/82

1

I. INRODUCION

BACkgROUND

his report provides analysis o indings rom both surveys: Charity in the Republic o Macedonia and rust in Civil Society Organizations in the Republic o

Macedonia conducted on a nationally representative sample o citizens o Republic o Macedonia.

he goals o the survey were to explore the possibilities or mobilization o resources and to examine the trust o citizens and business community in civilsociety organizations and its stakeholders.

Macedonian Centre or International Cooperation (MCIC) has entrusted therole o surveying the public opinion to the Institute or Sociological, Juridical

and Political Researches, which was also responsible or the methodological correctness o both surveys.

ERMS AND DEFINIIONS

here is no common understanding o the concept (deinition) o civil societyin the Macedonian public and proessionals circles. However, within CIVICUS

Civil Society Index in Macedonia (MCIC, 2006) a group o 20 prominent actors in the civil society, as well as representatives rom the other sectors haveagreed on the deinition o civil society.

his deinition was also used as a starting point in this report, all formal andinformal associations of citizens, organizations and networks, filling in the societalspace among the family, business sector, political parties and authorities, whichmake these associations in order to fulfill common goals and interests. his deinition encompasses all civil society organizations (associations o citizens and

oundations), churches and religious organizations, trade unions and economicchambers.


14/82

1

In Macedonia there is still no distinction between the terms charity and philanthropy, or the use o dierent terms in Macedonian language such as charity,beneaction and good will giving. he widely accepted meaning o philanthropyis voluntary act o donating money or goods or providing other support on a

voluntary basis, usually or a longer period o time. Philanthropy is also the toolo the private sector to trigger social change. With the conventional deinitionon philanthropy, donations are or narrowly deined cause and they should contribute or visible change in social circumstances. hereore, requently large donations and inancial support are necessary or a longer term. he necessity orhigher inancial commitment makes the distinction between philanthropy andcharitable contribution. hereore, conventional use o philanthropy is beingapplied to wealthy individuals and sometimes oundations (or trusts) oundedby wealthy individuals.

his report ocuses on charity, but also the attitudes towards philanthropy andaltruism were both explored. he poll on charity covers the attitudes on valuesand norms, which are supportive such as the responsibility or resolving societalneeds, responsibility o business sector (social responsibility o enterprises), altruism (care or the needs o the other) as well as the ways or responding to thesocietal needs. he main part o the survey was ocused on motivation or charity, goals and methodology o charity.

MEhODOLOgY AND APPROACh

he survey was carried out through two series o interviews in the households inApril 2006 on a representative sample o 1,607 respondents and a discussion in 4ocus groups with citizens, businessmen and journalists on June 67, 2006.

1. QUESIONNAIRE

he questionnaires were developed in March 2006 by the responsible MCICsoicers in cooperation with ISPPIs experts.

For the purpose o the survey, the questionnaire covered the ollowing variables:

rust o citizens in institutions o public (state), business (private) and civilsector;

Inormation on civil society organizations and their activities;

Attitudes on civil society;


15/82

1

Attitudes and motives or charity;

Goal and target groups o charity;

Manner, time and inormation on charity;

Sociodemographic characteristics;

Religious and political orientation.

2. SAMPLE

he polls were carried out in April 2006 on a representative sample o 1,607 respondents each. he population o the sample was citizens older than 18 years oage, while criteria or representation were: gender, ethnical belonging, age, placeo residence and regions.

Out o 1,607 surveyed citizens, 49,5% were women, while 50,5 were men. Regarding the ethnical representation, 64% were Macedonians, 24% were Albanians, while 11,4% were rom other ethnical groups.

3. DAA PROCESSINg AND PRESENAION OF FINDINgS

All collected data were processed using the requency and proportion o answers. he results o the whole sample are presented in tables, including the

tables ollowing the sampling structure according to gender, age, ethnical belonging, education, place o residence, employment status, monthly income percapita in the households, political ailiation and region.

he probable correctness o data is 95% with an error o +/ 5%.

he report uses the term insigniicant minority or answers less than 10% o thesample, small minority rom 1130%, minority rom 3050%, majority rom 5165% and large majority or over 65%.

4. WORkINg gROUP

MCIC has included some o its oicers in all stages o the research, who are alsoauthors o this report: Saso Klekovski, executive director (II. rust; V. Responsibility or societal issues; Editor o the report); Gonce Jakovleska, public relations oicer (VI. Charity); Aleksandar Krzalovski, coordinator o crosssectorand international programs (III. rust and attitudes on civil society); SuncicaSazdovska, head o the civil society unit (IV. Understanding and attitudes on

civil society organizations); and Daniela Stojanova, project oicer (I. Introduction; Data processing and data presentation).


16/82

1


17/82

1

II. RUS

INRODUCION

rust is a key component o social capital. In general terms, three types o trustcan be identiied.

he irst is the social trust in those that are similar, particulate or personalizedtrust. his is a trust embedded in established relations or social networks (amily, riends, neighbors etc.)

he second is general or social trust, including trust in unknown persons.

he third is institutional trust, reerring to established trust in ormal governinginstitutions and society.

RUS IN SIMILARIY

AND gENERAL RUS

he citizens in Macedonia have highest trust in the amily (94,3%), against smallmajority o citizens (54,5%) having general trust in people.

grap II.1.how muc trust do you ave in people and amily?

Family

People

HaveDo not have

94,3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

5,6%

54,5%

45,5%


18/82

1

able II.1.Proile o trust

Characteristics Have trust (54,5%) No trust (45,5%)

Gender No inuenceAge No inuence

Ethnical belonging No inuence

Education Higher /advanced (59,8%)Uncompleted and primary education(58,1%/52,8%)

Employment status Employed/public sector (66,8%) Unemployed (54%)

Monthly income From 6.0019.000 MKD (63,9%) Up to 2.000 MKD (57%)

Party aliation SDSM (63,4%), DUI, DPA VMRONP (49,2%)

Urbanization own over 50.000 residents (58,9%) own up to 15.000 residents (52,7%)

RegionKumanovo (61,1%), Polog (63,8%),Pelagonija (61,9%)

Strumica (59%), Bregalnica (55,5%)

Dierences can be noted among citizens with dierent demographic characteristics.

Gender, age and ethnical belonging have no inluence, in comparison with education, employment status, monthly income, political ailiation as well as urbanization and region.

RUS IN INSIUIONS

With the trust in institutions, we have explored the trust according to the threesector approach: state, business (private) and civil sector. Media and politicalparties may belong to several sectors, so they were examined separately. Also, theinternational community was included ......

Only the media enjoy the trust o (small) majority. Close to majority are thebusiness and civil society sector and to some extent the international community. he state and political parties have minority support. he citizens have leastsupport in political parties, where as 50,7% o them have no trust at all.

he proile o trust in institutions ollows the characteristics o general trust.Certain deviations emerge according to the age, ethnical belonging and politicalailiation.


19/82

1

grap II. 2.how muc trust do you ave in:

he representatives o younger generations (1830 years) have more trust inbusiness sector (56,2%), while those above 65 years (including retired persons)

have less trust in all sectors apart rom the state media (trust 45,1%), businesssector (31,9%), civil sector (35,2%), international community (28,6%), and political parties (16,5%).

Ethnic Macedonians have lower trust in international community (35,1%) andpolitical parties (15,7%). Ethnic Albanians have higher trust in business sector(64,4%), international community (69,1%) and political parties (42,1%). Bothethnic Macedonians (26,5%) and ethnic Albanians (36,2%) have similar trust inthe state (29,2%).

Citizens who eel more inclined towards VMRODPMNE believe less in the civilsector (35%) and the international community (32,5%).

he citizens o Skopje have less trust in media (45,6%), state (19,7%), politicalparties (15%), and with slighter dierence in the other sectors.

Have

Do not have

Media

Business sector

Civil sector

International community

State

Political parties


20/82

0

RUS IN SAE SECOR

Dierent institutions dierently contribute or the (lack o) trust in the state.

grap II.3.rust in state sector

Education institutions enjoy the trust o large majority, while the public institutions and local governments o signiicant minority. Citizens have least trust inthe parliament, government and judiciary. here is a correlation between thelow trust in state and political parties and the president, parliament, governmentand judicary.

he proile o trust in state institutions ollows the trend o general trust.

Signiicant dierences emerge regarding the trust in local government. he trustis higher among ethnic Albanians (58,5%), DUI (57%), SDSM (55,7%) Polog(72,7%), Kumanovo (52,9%), Povardarie (53,8%), Pelagonija (46%). he trustin local government is lower among ethnic Macedonians (40,1%) Ohrid andBregalnica region (30,8%) and Skopje (36,2), and to some extent Strumica region (38,9%).

Have

Do not have

Education institutions

Public institutions

Local government

President

Parliament

Government

Judiciary


21/82

1

RUS IN BUSINESS SECOR

Regarding the trust in business sector, we have examined the trust in micro(amily), small and medium as well as large enterprises.

grap II.4.rust in business sector

he citizens have highest trust in micro companies, in contrast to large enterprises. his is correlated with high trust in amily (trust in similarity).

he proile o trust in business institutions ollows the pattern o general trust.More accentuated are the regional dierences: Polog region has high trust inmicro companies (86%), while Bregalnica region has low trust (46,1%).

Micro (amily)enterprises

Small and mediumenterprises

Large enterprises

Have

Do not have


22/82

CONCLUSIONS

1. Relatively low eneral trust and trust in institutions

Citizens have higher trust in those that are similar (amily 94,3%) while low general trust (54,5%) and trust in institutions.

Notably higher is the trust on micro or local level i.e. trust in micro enterprises(65,8%) and local government (45,5%). his is correlated with the trust in similarity.

here is less trust in larger, national institutions, with the exception o media(56,7%) and educational institutions (65,6%).

Particularly low is the trust in the president (33,1%), parliament (28,3%), government (26,6%), judiciary (23,8%) and political parties (22,35).

he correlation between the lack o trust and the perception o partisanship oinstitutions is possible.

2. Correlation o eneral trust and social indicators

he general trust is not correlated with gender, age and ethnicity.

here is correlation o general trust with the social indicators: education, employment status, monthly income, political ailiation. here is relation with theregion and to some extent with the degree o urbanization.

he trust is higher among citizens with higher education, which are employed,with higher monthly income and vice versa.

aking into consideration the relation o trust and social capital as well as o social capital and degree o development and wellbeing, an issue requiring urtherobservation is the relation between the higher trust (social capital) and relativelywell situated groups.


23/82

3. rust in institutions in correlation wit ae and etnicity

he trust in institutions is signiicantly correlated with indicators aecting thegeneral trust.

Additional dierences emerge with age and ethnicity.

he adults over 65 years o age have lower trust in institutions, especially in newones in contrast with the young (1830) who have higher trust in business andsomehow civil sector.

Ethnic Albanians have higher trust in new institutions: business sector, international community, political parties and local government.

Ethnic Albanians and ethnic Macedonians have similar (lack o) trust in state,but also similarly high trust in educational institutions.


24/82


25/82


26/82

Highest trust in civil society organizations is noted (understandably) among theemployees in the civil sector (77,8%), and ethnic urks (70,9%), unlike Roma(33,3%). he trust grows with the level o education. he other dierences aresmaller, and more notable is the higher trust among SDSM and DUI supporters

(59%), in contrast with VMRO (both DPMNE and NP) with around 45%.

he higher trust in churches and religious communities is observed in Pelagonija region (89%).

AIUDES ON CIVIL SOCIEY ORgANIzAIONS

Large majority o citizens (65,6%) think the civil society organizations are created in order to realize the interests o the citizens. On the other hand, majority citizens (55,1%) think that civil society organizations serve the interests ooreign countries, which organize and und them, while large majority (76,7%)think they are tool or skilled individuals to get money and power. he dierences according certain parameters are insigniicant.

grap III.2.Attitudes on civil society oraniations

Attitude 1. o what extent do youagree with the stance that civilsociety organizations are organizedby the citizens in order to realizethe interests o citizens?

Attitude 2. o what extent doyou agree with the stance thatcivil society organizations serveonly to the interests o oreignstates and oundations whichhelp them to organize andnance them?

No attitude15,0%

Fully disagree11,2%

Partiallydisagree

18,9% Partially agree35,7%

Fully agree19,4%

No attitude11,0%

Fully disagree10,2%

Partiallydisagree13,2%

Partially agree41,2%

Fully agree24,4%


27/82

here is inconsistency in the responses, considering the act that attitude 1 isrelatively contradicted to attitudes 2 and 3, and there is majority consent or allthree o them.

CIVIL SOCIEY ORgANIzAIONSAND POLIICAL PARIES

Majority citizens (61,1%) think that many capable people are not party membersand that civil society organizations allow their opinion to reach out the public.his attitude is more common or the employees in the public and civil sector(>70%), in contrast to those in the private (58%), as well as housewives and retired persons (


28/82

grap III.3.Political parties and teir leaders:

o the direct question on ideological/party color o speciic civil society organizations, small minority thinks that there is such relation (in all cases, except orHCHR, it is below 10%).

able III.1.List te oraniations or wic you believe are ideoloically party col-ored:

ORgANIzAION %

Helsinki Committee o Human Rights o Republic o Macedonia (HCHR) 10,5

Association o Journalists o Macedonia (AJM) 8,5

Union o Womens Organizations in Republic o Macedonia (SOZM) 6,0

Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia (FOSIM) 5,9

El Hilal 5,9

ransparency Macedonia 5,7

Union o Associations o Pensioners o Macedonia 4,3

Macedonian Centre o International Cooperation (MCIC) 2,9

Macedonian Red Cross 2,7

Institute o Sustainable Communities / Centre o Institutional Development 1,4

First Childrens Embassy in the World Megjasi 1,3

Polio Plus 0,4

Hide behind some civilsociety organization

akeover when they

have party interests

Do not pay attention to thepositions o civil society

organizations

No answerHave

Do not have


29/82

CONCLUSIONS

1. Divided trust in civil society oraniations

he citizens trust in civil society organizations is divided (50,3% have trust,while 49,7% do not). he trust grows with the level o education. he trust inchurches and religious communities is higher, and lower in trade unions andeconomic chambers.

2. For citiens, orein countries and oundations or or capable individu-als?

Majority citizens agree with all three attitudes, which is relatively contradictory,

while the distribution o answers according dierent parameters is consistent(with small, insigniicant inconsistencies). Not a single o these attitudes can bepointed as dominant in the perception o citizens.

3. Civil society oraniations are non partisan, but requently abused by teparties

Majority citizens think that many capable people are not party members, andcivil organizations allow their opinion to get to the public. In addition, minor

ity citizens perceive speciic civil society organizations as ailiated to any party(


30/82


31/82

1

IV. UNDERSANDINg AND AIUDESON CIVIL SOCIEY ORgANIzAIONS

INRODUCION

he survey also addresses the understanding and attitudes on speciic civil society organizations.

Besides the general knowledge o civil society organizations, we also examined

the amiliarity with civil society organizations working in three areas: ightagainst poverty, civil society development and ight against corruption.

gENERAL UNDERSANDINg OF CIVILSOCIEY ORgANIzAIONS

he general knowledge o civil society organizations was irst examined by requesting rom the respondents to list the organizations without any reminder orsuggesting examples.

grap IV.1.List up to tree civil oraniations you are amiliar wit:

No answer

Others

MCIC

FOSIM

Helsinki Committee oHuman Rights

MOS

ADI

Red Cross

SOZM

Ecologist Associations

El Hilal

Union o Associations oPensioners o Macedonia

Megjasi

Other womenorganizations

ransparency Macedonia


32/82

Large majority o respondent could list speciic organizations (67,2%).

Beore analyzing which organizations were usually listed, it is worth noting that

the survey was conducted beore the election campaign on parliamentary elec

tions 2006, which might be the reason why some o the organizations that hadelections related activities are high on the list. he citizens mainly listed the or

ganizations which are active in the country or a longer period o time (more

than 10 years), have international character, networks or umbrella organizations

with massive membership and organizations on national level.

For some civil society organizations, the ethnicity aects the knowledge, so there

is an inclination or members o one ethnic group to mention same organiza

tions. his depends on the target group o the organizations.

able IV.1.

Proile o people amiliar wit civil society oraniations

Characteristics Familiar (67,2%) Do not know (32,8%)

Gender No inuence

Age rom 18 to 30 years (73,7%) Over 65 years (45,1%)

Ethnical belonging No inuence

Education Higher/advanced (83,5%) No primary (67,7%)Employment status Employed/public sector (81,4%) Framer, not active (61%, 45%)

Monthly income Over 12.000 MKD (78,7%) Up to 2.000 MKD (44,5%)

Political aliation No particular inuence

Urbanization own (75%) Village (43,8%)

Region Kumanovo (86,8%), Stip (80,1%) Strumica (49,1%), Pelagonija(60,8%)

I we make a proile o the average understanding o a citizen on civil society

organizations, we can note that the gender, ethnicity and political ailiation have

no inluence. However, there is a signiicant dierence regarding the education

i.e. those with higher and advanced education know much more about the civil

society sector (16,5% cannot state speciic civil society organization). he re

spondents who have not completed primary education, and who have responded

the questions, in most cases (50%) list organizations with social and humanitar

ian character, while as the level o education increases, the knowledge in other

types o organizations is also increasing. he age also has inluence, so the young


33/82

people rom 18 to 30 years o age know more about the civil society organiza

tions (26,3% did not list civil society organization) than the older over 65 years

(45,1% could not list speciic organization). he employees in the public sector

and those with higher monthly income know more about the civil society than

armers and inactive citizens and those who have monthly income up to 2,000MKD per member o households. he urbanization and region also have inlu

ence. hose who live in Kumanovo and Stip know much more than those living

in Strumica and Pelagonija, which matches the number and level o activities o

the civil society organizations working in these regions.

he speciic knowledge was examined or organizations working on ighting

poverty, civil society development and combating corruption, and the respon

dents were asked to list certain organizations without any reminding or giving

examples.

grap IV.2.

Oraniations reconied as participatin in te it aainst poverty

he knowledge o organizations working in these three areas is dierent, where

there is much better knowledge o organizations ocused on ight against poverty

than on organizations working on civil society development. he least is the

knowledge o organizations working on ight against corruption.

Jeta

No answer

Others

MCIC

FOSIM

International organizations

Red Cross

El Hilal

Mother heresa

Red Crescent


34/82

he irst two places on the list o civil society organizations working in the ield

o poverty are occupied by socialhumanitarian organizations, providing imme

diate assistance. Although the target groups o these organizations are the poor

est, the general trend that those with higher income know more about these or

ganizations is also present here. Majority o citizens (62,2%) cannot list a singlecivil society organizations working in the ield o poverty.

grap IV.3.Oraniations reconied as participatin in te strentenin o civil soci-ety

he organizations ocused on civil society development, and then organizations

working on human rights protection, elections and democratization are recognized as organizations working on civil society development. Large majority ocitizens (70,9%) cannot list single organization working on civil society development.

No answer

Others

MCIC

FOSIM

Helsinki Committee oHuman Rights

MOS

International organizations

ransparency Macedonia

ESE

AnticorruptionCommission


35/82


36/82

grap IV.5.I ave eard/now o:

he results show that the number o those that know about certain organizationis dramatically declining in comparison with those that are inormed, and orsome organizations this number is halved.

Both considering the inormation and knowledge, high on the list are the well

known organizations, with longer history and organizations active on nationallevel. It is possible that there presence in the media has some inluence.

I have heard I know

MCK

HCHR

SZPM

SSUKM

SOZM

FOSIM

DEM

Megjasi

AJM

ZIOM

ransparency

MCIC

OPM

El Hilal

ZELS

Polio Plus

ESE

Euro Balkan

ADI

MEDF

Mesecina

ISC/CID

CGI


37/82

AIUDES (POSIIVE/NEgAIVE)ON CIVIL SOCIEY ORgANIzAIONS

hose that have knowledge in civil society were asked to say whether they have

positive or negative attitude or each o the 23 listed organizations.

he positive attitudes on civil society organizations are more requent in comparison with the negative. he negative attitudes are present among insigniicantminority o respondents (up to 10%), and only or three o the total 23 organizations, the negative attitudes exceed 10% (rom 11,7 to 16,6%) which is smallminority o citizens.

grap IV.6.

Ratio positive aainst neative attitudes1

1 Te ratio between the positive and negative attitude is given in the brackets

Positive opinion Negative opinion I have not heard/ do not know about it

Macedonian Red Cross (7,4)

Megjasi (9,9)

DEM (8,7)

SOZM (4,3)

HCHR (2,4)

SZPM (4,8)

FOSIM (2,5)

ZIOM (7,5)

SSUKM (1,7)

El Hilal (2,5)

Polio plus (13,5)

AJM (3,7)

ransparency Macedonia (3,3)

MCIC (4,9)

OPM (2,9)

ZELS (2,1)

ESE (3,7)

ADI (1,7)

Mesecina (1,7)

Euro Balkan (3,4)

MEDF (1,9)

ISC/CID (2,0)

CGI (3,3)


38/82

It is obvious that there is dominantly positive public opinion or all surveyedcivil society organizations. he ratio between positive and negative attitudes ispositive or all organizations that were included in the survey, i.e. or one respondent with negative attitude there are at least 1,7 respondents with positive

attitude (or lowest ranking organizations) and up to 13,5 respondents or thehighest ranked organization.

FAMILIARIY WIh PERSONS FROMCIVIL SOCIEY SECOR

he survey on amiliarity with persons rom the civil society sector was based on

recognition rom a list o 15 persons along with their photos.

he recognition o these 15 persons varies.

grap IV.7.Reconiin iures rom te civil society sector

Minority o citizens know about most (2/3) o the ofered candidates. Majority o

respondents have recognized one third o the persons.

odor Petrov

Vladimir Milcin

Mirjana Najcevska

Slagjana aseva

Gjuner Ismail

Dragi Zmijanac

Savka odorovska

Vesna VelicSteanovska

Zoran Jacev

Zvonko Shavreski

Saso Klekovski

Marijana Loncar Velkova

Albert Musliu

Zoran Stojkovski

Suad Misini


39/82

Te amiliarity with persons (leaders) is related with the amiliarity o organizations they run.

he amiliarity is highest with those that are active or a longer period o time in

the sector. It is possible their presence in the public and the presentation o theirattitudes to aect the recognition.

grap IV.8.Relation trust lac o trust2

CONCLUSIONS

1. good nowlede o civil society oraniations, but siniicantly less nowl-ede o teir wor in speciic areas

he citizens in Macedonia have good general knowledge o civil society organizations. Vast majority (67,2%) o the citizens can state speciic civil societyorganizations.

he results are unavorable when the speciic knowledge about the civil societyorganizations is being examined. So, majority o citizens (62,2%) can state not asingle civil society organization working in the ield o poverty, and large majority are not able to pinpoint at least one organization working in the civil societydevelopment and combating corruption (70,9%, and 75,7% respectively).

2 Te number in the brackets beside the name shows the relation o trust against lack o trust o the citizen inthe relevant person

Has Does not Does not know them

Mirjana Najcevska (1.93)

Vladimir Milcin (1.73)

Dragi Zmijanac (3,51)

Gjuner Ismail (2.16)

odor Petrov (0.8)Vesna VelicSteanovska (2.65)

Slagjana aseva (1.48)

Savka odorovska (1.58)

Zvonko Shavreski (3.56)

Zoran Jacev (1.64)

Saso Klekovski (2.32)

Marijana Loncar Velkova (1.74)

Albert Musliu (1.43)

Suad Misini (1.42)

Zoran Stojkovski (0.83)


40/82

0

his indicates that civil society organizations are not proiled enough in the public because large majority o citizens (over 2/3) are not able to make the connection between speciic organizations and their activities in speciic areas.

2. Correlation between te nowlede about civil society oraniations andsocial indicators

Gender, ethnicity and political ailiation are not correlated with the generalknowledge o the civil society organizations, but the other social indicators suchas education, employment status and monthly income have inluence. In addition, age, urbanization and region are related with the knowledge about civilsociety organizations.

hose that are inormed about the civil society are members o the middle class

i.e. welleducated, live in the cities, employed in the public sector, have highermonthly income and in average are younger.

3. Correlation between te nowlede o civil society oraniations and teproile o oraniations

he knowledge o citizens o Macedonia about certain civil society organizations is related with the proile o organization, most o all the level on whichthey work (local/national) and the sector in which they work. he citizens tend

to have better knowledge about organizations (and leaders) working on nationallevel and cover sectors and target groups or which the citizens are more willingto give (see VI Charity).

Furthermore, other actors might also have eect, such as the volume o activities, especially beore and during the survey, the time o their existence and presence in the media.

4. Public as positive opinion o civil society oraniations

he positive opinion about the civil society organizations is dominant in thepublic and negative opinions on certain civil society organizations are presentamong insigniicant minority (under 10%).


41/82


42/82

he highest are the expectations towards the state (54,8%) and local government(19,8%), and lower towards the citizens themselves and civil society organizations (civil sector) and enterprises (business sector).

he proile o those supporting the responsibility o various actors is relativelyhomogenous and there are no signiicant deviations according to the characteristics, with the exception o highest expectations rom the state in the southwestern (70,3%) and Pelagonija region (63,6%).

hese attitudes are correlated with the low level o trust in altruism o others.

grap V.2.Attitude on altruism unselis concern or welare o oters

here is high homogeneity in the attitudes on altruism, with very small deviations. More Albanians (38%) and citizens rom the northeastern (46,30%) andPolog region (38,70%) believe in altruism, and less the citizens with uncompleted primary education (15,8%), rom southeastern (13,9%) and eastern region(9,6%).

Considering the responsibility o business sector, the emphasis is on the relation towards employees and state and then towards the community and environment

Solidarity,willingness to help

26,4%

I do not know 12,2%

Concerned only orthemselves, not interested

in helping61,4%


43/82

grap V.3.Business entities and enterprises are responsible or:

hese attitudes are common or various groups. However, higher expectationsor regular salaries have those with uncompleted primary education (63,2%).here are some interesting regional dierences high expectations or regularpayments are present in the southeastern (62,5%) and eastern region (73,7%),

in contrast to southwestern (39,9%) and Pelagonija region (40,9%), where in thelatter there are high expectations or community support (22,2%).

WAYS OF RESOLVINg SOCIEAL NEEDS

he citizens, in the light o the expectations rom the state or resolving the societal needs, believe that most beneicial will be the increased responsibility o

state and business sector.

Education and training or employment is a way or responding to the societalneeds (e.g. employment), against the low expectations rom the sociohumanitarian assistance.

he dierences in attitudes emerge only according to level o education. Onlythose with uncompleted primary education (23,7%) believe in sociohumanitarian assistance. hose with high education believe in increasing the responsibilityo state and business sector (43,5%), unlike those with uncompleted primaryeducation (21,1%) and with primary education (30,5%). he important thing

o pay regularly their employees

o pay taxes to the state

o support the community

Nothing

o protect the environment


44/82

is that there are no dierences regarding the training o citizens among dierent educational structures, and highest trust in this type o empowerment havethose with income above 12.000 MKD/per capita (49,4%).

grap V.4.e societal needs o citiens can be met by:

hese attitudes towards the socialhumanitarian assistance are supported by the

preerences o the above stated options.grap V.5.e social and umanitarian assistance do not resolve te problem, te peo-ple sould be empowered and trained to resolve teir problems.

hose with uncompleted primary education strongly disagree with this attitude(I do not agree at all 21,1%).

Increased responsibilityo state and private sector

Providing training ocitizens or employment

Inluence o citizens in decisionmaking o institutions

Social and humanitarian assistanceor others in need

Do not know

Do not know 5,3%

Fully disagree 7,7%

Partiallydisagree12,9%

Partially agree 36,8%

Fully agree37,3%


45/82

CONCLUSIONS

1. e state is te most responsible or resolvin te societal needs

Majority citizens (54,8%) believe that the state is most responsible or resolvingthe societal needs and they will be met in the best way by increasing the responsibility o the state and business sector (36,3%).

he high expectations towards the state, with lower expectations rom the citizens and almost no expectations rom the business sector, is in avor o the etatistic culture, as a residue o state socialism, i.e. low public support or constitutingMacedonia as liberaldemocratic constitutional system.

2. hi perception o selisness o te oter

Only 26,4% believe in solidarity o citizens. Least trust have those with uncompleted primary school (15,8%), most likely as selperceived victims o the carelessness o the others.

3. Low expectations or social responsibility o enterprises

he expectations towards the business sector are low or almost missing. Only1,4% o the citizens believe that business sector is most responsible or resolving the societal needs. he only perceived responsibilities o the enterprises areregular salaries and taxes (only 27,8%). he environment is the last priority with4,2%, which is even less than those thinking that the business sector has no responsibility at all (4,9%). hese expectations are low probably as there is no concept o social activity o enterprises.

In the Civil Society Index (MCIC, 2006), the request or responsibility rom busi

ness sector was an area without any activities and inluence on the civil societyorganizations.

4. Social and umanitarian assistance are not solution or problems, but teemployment is

here is high (ull and partial) consent (74,1%) that social and humanitarianassistance is not a solution or the problems. hose with uncompleted primaryeducation mostly disagree with this, probably because they are perceived as agroup in need.


46/82

35,9% believe in empowering and training.

hese public attitudes can be supportive or paying more attention to the development and not the social assistance.

On the other hand, in the motives, goals and target groups o charity, conlictingcommitments o citizens can be seen.


47/82

VI. ChARIY

INRODUCION

Good deal o civil society organizations consider the charity to be a way outo the current situation triggered by the departure o numerous donors romMacedonia. In their perspective, the charity is a way out or their halemptybudgets. his is why MCIC wanted to check the actual situation. he survey

shows whether and to what extent the civil society organizations can rely oncharity rom citizens as a source o unding or their uture work.

AIUDES ON ChARIY

Family is the institution where charity should be learned, is the opinion o majority o respondents (50%).

grap VI.1.how and were carity sould be learnt?

In the amily

As part o ormal education

Philanthropy should not be learnt

Media campaign

Extracurricular activities in school

Do not know

In religious communities

In civil society organizations

Other


48/82


49/82

grap VI.2.e carity contribution collected rom citiens sould be used only pur-poseully

Considering the education structure o respondents there is anincreasing percentageo those who thinkthat charity donationsare only partially usedpurposeully, starting rom 21,1% o the

respondents with uncompleted primaryeducation up to 47% o the respondents with completed advanced or higher education. And vice versa, the percentage o respondents who said charity donations are never used purposeully is being reduced rom 28,9% or respondentswho have not completed the primary education to 11,2% o the respondents whohave completed advanced or higher education.

Considering the employment status o respondents, the critical attitude o employees in civil society organizations can be noted. he least percentage (20%)agrees that charity donations are partially used or the purpose, against 47,2%o the employees rom the public sector. Large percentage (40%) o these respondents (employed in the civil sector) agreed that they are partially not used orthe purpose, against 22,8% o armers or 25,2% unemployed. he same situation happens with the attitude they are never used or the purpose, whichwas chosen by 26,7% o the employees in the civil sector, in contrast to 7,5% ostudents or 9,4% o employees in public sector.

he dierences can be noted regarding the region where the respondents comerom. Respondents rom Vardar region (29,9%) are least assured o the purposeul use o charity donations, in comparison with respondents rom Pelagonijaregion (59,8%). Regarding the not purposeul use o charity donations, the mostassured are respondents rom Vardar region (57%), in comparison with respondents rom Skopje region (38,4%).

Yes, always5,4%

Partially usedor the purpose

42,7%

Partially not usedor the purpose 28,1%

Never used orthe purpose 14,5%

Do not know 9,4%


50/82

0

here is no majority answer to the question about the beneit o those who give.Nothing is the answer o 42,5% o respondents, where 17,9% said that eedbackon where the money was sent would be enough.

grap VI.3.ose wo ive, sould et

Inormation on using the assistance is the most expected reaction or 20,6% othe employees in the public sector, in comparison with 5,3% o armers. axexemption is the answer o 19,6% o the respondents rom Polog region, in comparison with only 0,6% rom Pelagonija region, who think that this is the relevantsatisaction. he respondents rom the northeastern region 8,8% least agree withthe attitude that the charity givers should get nothing, in comparison with 60,2%o respondents rom Pelagonija region, which have chosen this option.

42.5%Nothing

Inormation howthe money was used

Note o gratitude

Do not know

ax exemption

Public gratitude byrevealing the name

Other


51/82

1

MOIVAION

Having in mind the dierence between the declarative statements and reality, thequestion in the survey was have they given something in the past 12 months?

hose who give the least are the persons above 65 years (56,3%), those withuncompleted primary school or completed just primary education 42,1% and42,2% respectively, retired persons 43,2% and respondents rom northeasternregion 40,4%).

grap VI.4.have you iven money or oods in te past 12 monts?

High percentage o respondents said they were giving. Vast majority o 83,2%rom the respondents give rom various reasons.

People over 65 years (17,2%) and those with completed primary education(29,1%) least believe in the attitude that people should mutually help each other,they give rom sympathy (over 65 years 31,3%, those with completed primaryeducation 29,1%). he respondents rom Pelagonija and Polog region mostlybelieve in the attitude that people should support each other, 58% and 59,4%respectively.

Yes, several times

No

Only once

Yes, regularly almostevery month and

in each action


52/82

It is interesting that the motivation o businessmen or charity is the superstition.o the most o the participants in the ocus group, the thought that their businesswill turn bad i they do not give something has crossed their mind.

grap VI.5.Wy do you ive?

he celebrities oten appear as ambassadors o good will in the charity activities. We asked the participants whether these celebrities aect their decision oncharity.

grap VI.6.how do celebrities inluence te decision on carity

People should support each other

From sympathy

I do not give

I have enough and I can give

Superstition (or luck)

Other

o get rid o those who are persistent

47.6%

Do not know 14,9%

High inluence 15,8%

No inluence 32,6%

Little inluence 36,7%


53/82

he Ambassadors o good will are least inluential or the respondents romsouthwestern region, and most to those rom the northeastern region.

he best ambassadors o good will are the artists (42,5%) and athletes (17,8%) is

the opinion o respondents.

grap VI.7.Wic proessions are best or ambassadors o ood will?

47% o Macedonians and 25,8% o ethnic Albanians think the artists are the bestambassadors. Ethnic Albanians preer the religious persons (19,2%), in comparison to Macedonians (4,4%). he education also plays signiicant role in determining the proession o good will ambassadors. So 21,1% o respondents withuncompleted primary education support the religious persons or ambassadorso good will, in contrast to just 7,5% o respondents with completed advancedand higher education.

According to the regions, 65,9% o respondents rom Pelagonija region thinko the artists as best ambassadors, whereas 31,4% o respondents rom easternregion see the athletes as good will ambassadors.

Esma Rexhepova is more recognized as good will ambassador rom Macedonians (24%) than rom ethnic Albanians (9,1%), just as ose Proeski, or whom25,5% o Macedonians think o him as good will ambassador, in comparison to7,3% o ethnic Albanians. he respondents rom eastern region (39,1%) recog

nize Esma Rexhepova as good will ambassador, while those rom Vardar regiongive advantage to ose Proeski (34,6%).

Artists

Athletes

Religious leaders

Businessmen

Prominent businessmen and experts

Activists o civil organizations

Scientists and proessors

Other

Journalists

Politicians


54/82

grap VI.8.Name one o te ambassadors o ood will, wic is te best in your opinion

However, 16,3% o the respondents remain unmotivated or charity. he optionI do not have enough or mysel was mostly chosen by persons above 65 years(21,9%), the respondents who have not completed or with completed primary

education (31,6%, and 23,6% respectively) and those with income up to 2.000MKD (21,5%).

grap VI.9.Wy do you not ive?

I give

I do not have enough (I need welare)

I do not trust anyone, suspicious o rauds

I do not believe in the eect

Everyone should take care o onesel

I want, but I do not how

Other

I am not inormed how the money is spent

No answer

Esma Rexhepova

ose Proeski

Other

Boris rajanov

riun Kostovski

Simon rpcevski

Kaliopi

Adrian Gaxha

Bexhet Pacoli


55/82

hose that have given in the past 12 months were asked about the purpose otheir giving. he highest ranking was the health issues.

grap VI.10.

I you ave iven in te past 12 monts, wat was te purpose?

able VI.1.I you ive, wat are your priority oals areas or ivin?

Health % 16.6

Children, youth and students % 11.3

Persons with special needs % 13.5

Social welare (humanitarian) % 9.4

Democracy, human rights and rule o law, anticorruption % 6.6

Religious communities % 4.9

Rural development % 3.7

Old people % 7.1

Education and science % 6.2

Women and gender issues % 3.4

Environment and nature % 4.2

Nonviolence and tolerance % 3.8

Ethnic communities % 2

Civil Society Development % 1.9

Sport, hobby and recreation % 2.3

Culture and art % 2.1Patriotic % 1

For people requiringexpensive medical treatment

Other (10 denars on the street)

I have not given

For several o the above purposes

Call or helping children

with malignant diseases

Macedonia or victims o tsunami

Friends o childrens hospital

Help or burnt schools


56/82

Looking at the priorities o citizens, it is evident that the irst priority or givingis the health, ollowed by the persons with special needs and children etc.

grap VI.11.

I you ive, wat to wat level do you ive priority?

he survey showed that people want to give in the place o their residents, theirimmediate surroundings, i.e. locally in their neighborhood unit. his option waschosen as irst priority by majority o 55% o respondents. he geographical distance rom the place o residence means declining o percentage o respondentthat chose that option, so 24% give priority to the giving in municipality or city,while or 9,8% to the giving on national level is priority. he second priority isthe municipality or the town in which the respondents live (53%), and the thirdis the region (59,1%).

WhA AND hOW MUCh CIIzENS gIVE

Majority o those that give, i.e. 52,4%, give money.

he respondents with uncompleted primary education give more goods (36,8%)than money (18,4%). Moreover, those with income up to 2.000 MKD give lessmoney (38,1) just as the respondents rom northeastern region (29,4%).

O those who give money (52,3%), most have given 50 t 100 MKD (15,6%), or10 t 50 MKD (14,2%).

Locally in the neighborhood unit

In the municipality or town

Nationally (Macedonia)

In the region (Macedonia)

Internationally (outside Macedonia)

No answerPriority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3


57/82

o the question how much have you given in the past 12 months, the respondents have been supposed to assign value to the given goods.

grap VI.14.how muc in total ave you iven in carity money and oods in te past12 monts?

grap VI.12.Wen you ive, wat do youmost oen ive?

grap VI.13.I you ave iven money, wat waste amount?

Money52,4%

Goods 23,9%

I have not given17,6%

In charitywork 6,2%

I have not givenmoney 30,0%

50100 MKD15,6%

1050 MKD14,2%

100500 MKD

9,3%

Over 500 MKD6,6%

Petty cash less

than 10 MKD4,4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

100 500 MKD

I have not given anything

Do not remember

500 1,000 MKD

Less than 100 MKD

1,000 2,000 MKD

I have not given money or goods

2,000 5,000 MKD

5,000 10,000 MKD

Over 10,000 MKD


58/82

MEChANISMS OF gIVINg(hOW MACEDONIAN CIIzENS gIVE?)

he mechanisms o giving may hinder or acilitate the giving. hereore, it isimportant to know what mechanism will be chosen. he citizens preer to giveon hand, or rom door to door . his type o giving was prioritized by 34,5%o respondents. he most requent second priority is giving on a bank account(with pay order) chosen by 20,6% rom respondents, while the third priorityincludes the pay orders (16,6%) but also telephone donation, i.e. giving throughthe phone or short text messagesSMS (16,3%).

Ethnic Albanians preer to give on hand, i.e. rom door to door (47,6%), in comparison to 27,8% o Macedonians. his percentage is larger or the respondents

who have not completed primary education (50%) or have completed primaryeducation (45,5%), in comparison with those who have completed advanced orhigher education (28,7%). he armers (52,6%) and housewives (50,9%) preerto give on hand as well as the respondents rom northeastern region (50%).

he employees in civil society sector preer to give through pay order i.e. on thebank account (46,7%).

able VI.2.

Wat is your preerred way o ivin:

1 2 3

From door to door (on hand) % 34,5 13,3 9,6

On bank account % 27,0 20,6 16,6

eledonation (SMS, phone) % 12,1 17,9 16,3

In a charity box % 11,4 18,3 11,3

By buying objects (auction, store) % 4,9 7,7 10,2

By buying services (concerts, etc) % 3,4 7,1 11,8

By buying branded products % 2,3 6,0 10,5

Credit card % 1,7 5,2 5,6

Buying lottery ticket /bingo % 1,6 1,9 6,2

No answer % 1,1 2,0 2,0

Business people think that there should be an organization or institution towhich they can make charity donation when they can/want to do that. heythink that some o the goods they have given do not end in the hands o those inneed, simply because there is no such institution.


59/82

grap VI.15.Do you aree wit te option o ivin 1-2% o te personal tax or carity,instead o te state?

Vast majority o respondents(71,3%) think that 12% o thepersonal income tax should begiven or charity, instead o to thestate, as one o the mechanismsor giving.

grap VI.16.Wat is your preerred way o ivin, directly or trou intermediaries?

Almost hal o the respondentswant to give directly (49,8%).he respondents rom north

eastern region are least willing to give through intermediaries (3,7%) in comparisonwith those rom southwesternregion (27%).

Although more than hal othe respondents said they didnot preer intermediaries, the

other hal has made a list o possible intermediaries.

Directly49%

Do not know10%

All the same26%

hrough intermediaries 15%

Yes71,3%

No11,3%

Do not know17,4%


60/82

0

grap VI.17.State to wom or trou wic oraniation you preer to ive:

Although large percentage o people (56,4%) do not want to give through intermediaries, it is worth looking at the reasons why the others chose to give through

intermediaries.

Vast majority (81,5%) o the respondents want to give directly to the beneiciary.

grap VI.18.Wy do you preer to ive trou intermediaries?

I do not preer intermediaries

Increased eiciency(more money is collected)

More control

No answer/ do not know

Other

I do not preer intermediaries

No answer

Macedonian Red Cross and Red Crescent

Church and religious community

Public institution (hospital, school)

Neighborhood unit or municipality

Civil society organization

International organization

Other


61/82

1

he respondents with completed advanced or high education have least trust inintermediaries. Almost 40,9% o them give directly because they want to avoidthe rauds. Unlike them those that have not completed primary education andarmers are least concerned o the rauds, 13,2% and 12,3% respectably. he

need to be sure where the money is given is higher among those with incomeover 12.000 MKD per capita in the household or 43,2% o them give directly inorder to avoid hoax.

grap VI.19.Wy do you preer to ive trou directly to te beneiciary?

INFORMAION ON ChARIY ACIVIIES

Electronic media are most eicient in disseminating inormation on charitable

activities, but also the direct communication/inormation cannot be neglected.

he electronic media penetrate mostly among Macedonians, i.e. 43,4% o themind the inormation on charitable donations in this way, in comparison with18,2% ethnic Albanians. On the other hand, most o the Albanians (25,8%) getinormation rom the riends and neighbors, in contrast to 5,7% o Macedonians.he education also plays great role in the way o getting inormation. hose whohave completed advanced or higher education are more inormed through theelectronic media (40,7%), than those who have not completed primary educa

tion (23,7%). Also the number o those which remain ignorant is larger amongthose who have not completed the primary education (21,1%) compared with

o avoid abuse

I want to see whom I give

I would not give directly

No answer/ do not know

I want to see thegratitude personally

I want him/her to

see who is giving


62/82


63/82

CONCLUSIONS

1. Minority o respondents 42,6% believe tat te unds are not used pur-poseully, wile 17,9% expect eedbac on ow tese unds were used.

here is still high percentage o those who think that the unds are not usedpurposeully (14,5% are quite conident about it, while 28,1%, are partially conident), whereas 17,9% o the respondents said they have expected inormationon how these unds were utilized. he charity should be learned in the amily,which plays the main role in the ormation o one human person.

2. Many people ive, but irreularly. Most people ive or ealt, or cil-dren, yout and persons wit special needs.

he percentage o those who give is high (83,2%). In comparison, the results romthe survey on solidarity o citizens conducted in 2001 showed that almost othe citizens do not give. his indicates that the level o charity has been improvedsince 2001. Unortunately, in spite o the high percentage o those who give, thepercentage o those giving regularly (on a monthly basis) is small (8,3%). People

mostly give because they think they should support each other. heir priorityin giving is the health (20,1%), children and youth (13,5%), ollowed by personswith special needs (13,5%) etc. In the past ive years, the priorities have slightlychanges in respect o what is being given. In 2001 most o the respondents havegiven in order to help the children (19%), to help the local church or mosque(16%), i.e. to help sick and handicapped persons (15%).

3. Money is mostly iven. e usual amount is amon 10 and 100 MkD.

People preer to give money (52,4%). Although the percentage was smaller,(38%), the money was the irst option even back in 2001. Unortunately, thevoluntary work in 2001 (2%) and now (6,2%) is at the bottom o the list. Whenthey give money, it is mostly in amount rom 10 to 100 MKD. As the amount increases, the number o those who have given declines. In comparison, 13% gaverom 100 to 500 MKD in 2001, while 9,3% in 2006.


64/82

4. Citiens preer to ive directly, on and.

Citizens mostly like to give on hand, or rom door to door (34,5%), then bypay order (27%) and SMS. hey preer direct giving (49,8%), instead o givingthrough intermediaries (14,6%). his is contrary to the attitude o 17,9% o the

respondents, which expected eedback on the assistance. he number o thosewho would chose the civil society organization as their intermediary is small,now (2,8%) and ive years ago (1%). he reason or direct giving is the ear oraud (31,1%) and the desire to see whom the assistance is given (26,6%).

5. e inormation on caritable activities is more eiciently disseminatedtrou electronic media.

Besides the opinion o journalists that they are not very much analytical regarding the charitable activities, thus not contributing or popularization o the concept o charity, the citizens see the electronic media as most eicient in disseminating inormation on charitable activities.


65/82

APPENDIX 1. QUESIONNAIRES

he answers are given in percentages (%)

RUS

1. how muc trust do you ave in people and te institutions?High trust

Partialtrust

Low trust No trust

People 9,9 44,6 26,1 19,4

Family 77,9 16,4 4,0 1,6

State 4,2 25,0 28,4 42,4

Business (private) sector 12,1 37,7 28,1 22,0

Civil (nongovernmental) sector 6,2 41,9 29,5 22,4

Political parties 3,5 18,8 27,0 50,7

Media 9,7 47,0 30,7 12,6

International community 11,0 33,5 28,9 26,7

2. how muc trust do you ave in te ollowin state institutions?

President 8,4 24,7 27,9 39,0

Government 4,9 21,7 27,3 46,2

Parliament 3,2 25,1 30,4 41,3

Judiciary 3,2 20,6 27,5 48,7

Education institutions 18,9 46,7 24,1 10,2

Public institutions 7,8 41,8 33,4 17,1

Local government 9,6 35,9 27,9 26,6

3. how muc trust do you ave in te ollowin types o business private sector?

Large enterprises 12,3 39,7 28,0 20,0

Small and medium enterprises 11,3 45,9 28,6 14,2

Micro (amily) enterprises 24,6 41,2 21,3 12,8


66/82

4. how muc trust do you ave in te ollowin civil society institutions?Civil society organizations (NGOs, citizensassociations)

7,7 42,6 31,5 18,2

Church and religious communities 29,4 39,0 19,2 12,4

rade unions 2,3 19,6 29,5 48,6

Economic chambers 3,2 26,7 34,2 35,8

AIUDES ON CIVIL SOCIEY

5. o wat extent do you aree wit testance tat civil society oraniations areoranied by te citiens in order to realiete interests o citiens?

6. o wat extent do you aree wit te sta-nce tat civil society oraniations serveonly to te interests o orein states andoundations wic elp tem to oranieand fnance tem?

Fully agree 24,4 Fully agree 19,4

Partially agree 41,2 Partially agree 35,7

Partially disagree 13,2 Partially disagree 18,9

Fully disagree 10,2 Fully disagree 11,0

No attitude 11,0 No attitude 15,2

7. o wat extent do you aree wit testance tat many capable people arenot members o a party? Civil societyoraniations allow teir opinion andactions to reac out to te public?

8. o wat extent do you aree wit testance tat most civil society oraniations

are tool or some clever individuals to etmoney and ave inuence?

Fully agree 24,1 Fully agree 44,3

Partially agree 37,0 Partially agree 32,4

Partially disagree 15,2 Partially disagree 10,6

Fully disagree 11,3 Fully disagree 2,9

No attitude 12,4 No attitude 9,7

9. Political parties and teir leaders:Do not pay attention to the positions o civil organizations 25,6

akeover when they have party interests 52,2

Hide behind some civil organization 20,3

No answer 1,9

10. List te oraniations or wic you believe are ideoloically party colored:

Helsinki Committee o Human Rights o Republic o Macedonia (HCHR) 10,5

Association o Journalists o Macedonia (AJM) 8,5


67/82

Union o Womens Organizations in Republic o Macedonia (SOZM) 6,0

Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia (FOSIM) 5,9

El Hilal 5,9


Union o Associations o Pensioners o Macedonia 4,3

Macedonian Centre o International Cooperation (MCIC) 2,9

Macedonian Red Cross 2,7

Institute o Sustainable Communities / Centre o Institutional Development 1,4

First Childrens Embassy in the World Megjasi 1,3

Polio Plus 0,4

RUS IN CIVIL SOCIEY11. List up to tree civil society oraniations you are amiliar wit:

MOS 9,6

FOSIM 6,5

Red Cross 5,2

SOZM 3,9

Ecologist Associations 3,9

El Hilal 3,9

MCIC 3,6Union o Associations o Pensioners o Macedonia 2,1


Helsinki Committee o Human Rights 2,1

ADI 1,1

Megjasi 0,8

Other women organizations 0,7

Others 21,8

No answer 32,8


68/82

List tree civil society oraniations in Macedonia, wic in your opinion, wor inte feld o:

12. Fit aainst poverty. 13. Strentenin o civil society.

Red Cross 9,4 FOSIM 6,3El Hilal 8,1 MCIC 3,8

MCIC 2,6 Helsinki Committee 2,9

International organizations(OSCE, USAID, UNDP, UN...)

1,9 MOS 2,6

FOSIM 1,4International organizations(OSCE, USAID, UNDP, UN...)

1,6

Mother Teresa 0,4 ransparency Macedonia 1,2

Red Crescent 0,2 S 0,2

Jeta 0,1 Anticorruption Commission 0,1Others 13,7 Others 10,5

No answer 62,2 No answer 70,9

14. List tree civil society oraniations in Macedonia wic in your opinion,wor on ft aainst corruption

Anticorruption Commission 9,1


Others 3,9Helsinki Committee o Human Rights 1,7

MOS 0,8

FOSIM 0,4

No answer 75,7

15. Wat do you now and wat is your opinion o te ollowin oraniations:Never eard o tat oraniation

1 I ave eard, but I do not now almost anytin2 I now te oraniation and ave very neative opinion3 I now te oraniation and ave neative opinion4 I now te oraniation and ave positive opinion5 I now te oraniation and ave very positive opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6

Foundation Open Society Institute Macedonia 18.3 40.3 5.1 6.6 24.5 5.2

Macedonian Centre o International Cooperation 39.8 37.3 1.7 2.2 14.9 4.1

Macedonian Enterprise Developmental Foundation 68.6 24.8 1.1 1.2 3.9 0.4

Helsinki Committee o Human Rights o Republic oMacedonia 13.7 35.4 6.3 8.6 30.2 5.7


69/82

Euro Balkan 65.8 25.3 1.7 1.6 4.9 0.8

Macedonian Red Cross 2.9 17.7 3.9 5.5 57.7 12.3

El Hilal 45.6 21.2 5.3 4.3 16.0 7.7

Movement o Ecologists o Macedonia 19.9 37.6 1.9 2.5 33.0 5.1

Union o Students within Ss. Kiril and MetodijUniversity

15.3 39.5 6.1 10.5 24.6 4.0

Association o Democratic Initiatives 66.0 24.5 1.7 1.8 5.0 0.9

Union o Womens Organizations in Republic oMacedonia

17.5 37.6 3.3 5.1 31.3 5.2

Association o Equality, Solidarity and Emancipation 61.8 25.4 1.4 1.3 9.2 0.9

ransparency Macedonia 38.8 35.2 2.2 3.8 17.1 2.9

Institute o Sustainable Communities/ Centre oInstitutional Development

77.5 16.2 0.7 1.4 3.5 0.6

HDZR Mesecina 70.7 21.8 0.7 1.0 5.2 0.5

PDAS Megjasi 25.8 30.7 1.7 2.3 32 7.5

Polio Plus 55.9 21.0 0.4 1.2 15.6 6.0

Association o SelGovernment Units 46.7 31.8 3.0 4.0 12.8 1.6

Union o Associations o Pensioners o Macedonia 14.6 43.7 2.2 5.0 29.2 5.3

Organization o Consumers o Macedonia 44 34.9 2.5 2.9 13.4 2.2

Association o Organizations o Invalids o Macedonia 29.2 37.6 1.4 2.5 24.1 5.2

Centre o Civic Initiative 84.6 11.6 0.3 0.6 2.6 0.4

Association o Journalists o Macedonia 26.4 47.6 3.0 2.5 18.7 1.8

16. how muc trust do you ave in te ollowin civil society fures?te respondents were iven a card wit a color poto, name and surname and tename o oraniation

hi trustMainly as

trustMainly as

no trustNo trust

Notamiliar

wit im/er

Vladimir Milcin 8,8 31,5 12,4 10,9 36,3

Savka odorovska 5,4 24,2 9,1 9,6 51,7

Suad Misini 2,5 9,0 4,7 3,4 80,5

Marijana Loncar Velkova 3,0 18,0 7,3 4,8 66,8

Zvonko Shavreski 11,0 16,4 3,2 4,5 65,0

Dragi Zmijanac 12,5 26,1 4,5 6,5 50,4

Zoran Jacev 5,8 21,3 9,8 6,7 56,4

Slagjana aseva 8,4 23,3 11,2 10,2 46,9

Mirjana Najcevska 11,8 28,6 12,2 8,7 38,7


70/82

0

Saso Klekovski 4,9 18,5 5,1 5,0 66,5

Albert Musliu 4,5 9,8 6,1 3,9 75,7

odor Petrov 8,7 24,0 18,0 23,1 26,2

Gjuner Ismail 6,5 29,0 9,0 7,4 48,1

Zoran Stojkovski 2,2 7,3 5,1 6,3 79,0

Vesna VelicSteanovska 9,5 22,3 5,8 6,2 56,2

ChARIY

1. Wo is most responsible or providin support to citiens in respondin to teirsocietal needs?

State 54,8

Local government 19,8

Citizens 16,1

Civil society organizations 4,3

Do not know 3,6

Enterprises 1,4

2. Most people are:

Concerned only or themselves, not interested in helping 61,4

Willing to help (solidarity) 26,4

Do not know 12,2

3. Business entities and enterprises are responsible or:Paying regularly their employees 51,5

Paying taxes to the state 27,8

Supporting the community 11,7

Nothing 4,9

Protecting the environment 4,2


71/82

1

4. Te societal needs o citiens can be met by:

Increased responsibility o state and private sector 36,3

Providing training o citizens or employment 35,9

Inuence o citizens in decision making o institutions 13,8

Social and humanitarian assistance or others in need 10,0

Do not know 3,9

5. Te social and umanitarian assistance do not resolve te problem, te peoplesould be empowered and trained to resolve teir problems.

Fully agree 37,3

Partially agree 36,8

Partially disagree 12,9

Fully disagree 7,7

Do not know 5,3

6. how and were carity sould be learnt?

In the amily 50,0

As part o ormal education 15,7

Charity should not be learnt 10,7

Media campaign 6,1

Extracurricular activities in school 6,0

Do not know 4,1

In religious communities 3,9

In civil society organizations 2,9

Other 0,6

7. Te carity contribution collected rom citiens are used only purposeully:

Yes, always 5,4Partially used or the purpose 42,7

Partially not used or the purpose 28,1

Never used or the purpose 14,5

Do not know 9,4


72/82

8. Tose wo ive, sould et:

Nothing 42,5

Inormation how the money was used 17,9

Note o gratitude 13,3

Do not know 9,7

ax exemption 8,7

Public gratitude by revealing the name 6,3

Other 1,6

9. have you iven money or oods in te past 12 monts?

Yes, regularly almost every month and in each action 8,3

Yes, several times 53,5

Only once 13,6

No 24,5

10. Wy do you ive?

People should support each other 47,6

From sympathy 21,2

I do not give 16,8

I have enough and I can give 5,4

Superstition (or luck) 4,9

Other 2,7

o get rid o those who are persistent 1,5

11. how do celebrities participatin in carity activities ambassadors o oodwill inuence Your decision on carity?

Little inuence 36,7

No inuence 32,6

High inuence 15,8

Do not know 14,9

12. Wic proessions are best or ambassadors o ood will?

Artists 42,5

Athletes 17,8

Religious leaders 8,3

Businessmen 7,4Prominent businessmen and experts 6,9


73/82

Activists o civil organizations 6,2

Scientists and proessors 5,4

Other 2,6

Journalists 1,6

Politicians 1,4

13. Name one o te ambassadors o ood will in Macedonia, wic is te best inyour opinion.

No answer 34,2

Esma Rexhepova 20,9

ose Proeski 19,8

Other 11,3

Boris rajanov 4,7

riun Kostovski 3,6

Simon rpcevski 2,3

Kaliopi 1,8

Adrian Gaxha 0,7

Bexhet Pacoli 0,7

14. Wy do you not ive?

I give 83,7

I do not have enough (I need welare) 9,2

I do not trust anyone, suspicious o rauds 1,6

I do not believe in the efect 1,4

Everyone should take care o onesel 1,3

I want, but I do not how 1,1

Other 0,9

I am not inormed how the money is spent 0,8

15. I you ave iven in te past 12 monts, wat was te purpose?

For people requiring expensive medical treatment 24,8

Other (10 MKD on the street) 23,7

I have not given 22,7

For several o the above purposes 13,5

Call or helping children with malignant diseases 5,7

Macedonia or victims o tsunami 4,4

Friends o childrens hospital 2,8

Help or burnt schools 2,6


74/82

16. I you ive, wat are your priority oals areas or ivin?

1 highest priority 5 lowest priority 1 2 3 4 5

Health 20,1 16,1 13,7 9,2 6,8

Children, youth and students 13,5 11,3 9,0 7,9 8,2

Persons with special needs 13,5 14,5 12,6 9,3 6,2

Social welare (humanitarian) 11,7 7,3 9,1 10,5 11,4

Democracy, human rights and rule o law, anticorruption 8,5 6,4 4,9 4,2 5,3

Religious communities 6,7 5,1 3,0 3,9 4,4

Rural development 4,1 3,1 4,0 4,5 5,8

Old people 4,0 7,9 9,3 11,2 5,3

Education and science 3,4 6,7 8,6 10,5 8,1

Women and gender issues 2,6 4,5 3,1 3,2 4,0

Environment and nature 2,4 4,8 5,5 5,2 6,0

Nonviolence and tolerance 2,2 3,6 5,5 4,7 5,4

Ethnic communities 1,9 2,2 2,0 2,7 1,9

Civil Society Development 1,8 1,7 2,3 3,7 4,2

Sport, hobby and recreation 1,7 1,9 3,2 3,5 10,2

Culture and art 1,2 2,2 3,0 4,2 5,1

Patriotic 0,8 0,8 1,3 1,5 1,8

17. I you ive, wat level as priority or ivin?

1 highest priority 5 lowest priority 1 2 3 4 5

Locally in the neighborhood unit 55,0 19,1 12,1 7,9 5,5

In the municipality or town 24,0 53,0 13,6 6,5 2,3

Nationally (Macedonia) 9,8 8,4 11,5 63,8 5,7

In the region (Macedonia) 6,3 16,4 59,1 13,3 4,3

Internationally (outside Macedonia) 4,4 2,6 3,1 7,7 81,2

No answer 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,9

18. Wen you ive, wat do you most oen ive?

Money 52,4

Goods (ood, clothes) 23,9

In charity work (care, care or elderly, transer o knowledge, etc.) 6,2

I have not given 17,6


75/82

19. I you ave iven money, wat was te amount?

Petty cash less than 10 MKD 4,4

10 50 MKD 14,2

50 100 MKD 15,6

100 500 MKD 9,3

Over 500 MKD 6,6

I have not given money 30

I do not remember 2,2

I have not given anything 17,6

20. how muc in total ave you iven in carity money and oods in te past 12monts?

100 500 MKD 24,2

I have not given anything 17,6

I do not remember 16

500 1.000 MKD 14,3

Less than 100 MKD 9,3

1.000 2.000 MKD 9

I have not given money or goods 6,2

2.000 5.000 MKD 2,4

5.000 10.000 MKD 0,6

Over 10.000 MKD 0,4

21. Wat is your preerred way o ivin? List your priorities rom 1 to 3, were 1is te iest priority.

1 2 3

From door to door (on hand) 34,5 13,3 9,6

On bank account 27 20,6 16,6

eledonation (SMS, phone) 12,1 17,9 16,3

In a charity box 11,4 18,3 11,3

By buying objects (auction, store) 4,9 7,7 10,2

By buying services (concerts, etc) 3,4 7,1 11,8

By buying branded products 2,3 6 10,5

Credit card 1,7 5,2 5,6

Buying lottery ticket /bingo 1,6 1,9 6,2

No answer 1,1 2 2


76/82

22. In some European countries, te citiens can ive 1-2% o te personal tax orcrity, instead o te state. Do you tin tat tis option sould be introduced inMacedonia?

Yes 71,3

No 11,3

Do not know 17,4

23. Wat is your preerred way o ivin, directly or trou intermediaries?

Directly 49,8

Trough intermediaries 14,6

All the same 26

Do not know 9,7

24. State to wom or trou wic oraniation you preer to ive.

1 highest priority 5 lowest priority 1 2 3

I do not preer intermediaries 53 53,4 53,3

Macedonian Red Cross and Red Crescent 12,6 9,2 5

Church and religious community 9,9 6 6,2

No answer 9,7 9,7 9,7

Neighborhood unit or municipality 4

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Trust Responsibility for Societal Issues and Charity in Macedonia

Documents