social responsibility of citizens

8/9/2019 Social Responsibility of Citizens

1/68

VOLUN

TEERIN

G

SOLID

A

RIT

Y

CHARITY

PUBLI

CSPIRITEDNESS

PA

RTICIPATION

SOCIALRESPONSIBILITY

OF CITIZENS


2/68

PublisherMacedonian Centre or International Cooperation

For the PublisherSao Klekovski

Executive Director

AuthorsSao KlekovskiAleksandar KralovskiGonce Jakovleska

Project OcerDaniela Stojanova

ranslatorViktorija Dimitrovska

Design and PrepressKoma Lab. Skopje

PrintBoro Graka, Skopje

Skopje, December 2007

No. o copies:800

Copyright 2007 Macedonian Centre or International Cooperation (MCIC), Skopje.All Rights Reserved.

Te opinions expressed here are those o the authors and do not necessarily representthose o the Macedonian Centre or International Cooperation.


3/68

ABLE OF CONENS

FOREWORD 5

LIS OF ABBREVIAIONS 7

EXECUIVE SUMMARY 9

INDEXES 12

I. INRODUCION 15I.1. Background 15I.2. erms and Deinitions 15I.3. Indexes 17

I.4. Methodology and Approach 18

II. RESPONSIBILIY FOR SOCIAL ISSUES 21II.1. Responsibility or social issues and altruism 21II.2. Ways o resolving the social issues 23II.3. Participation o citizens 24Conclusion 25

III. PUBLIC SPIRIEDNESS 27Conclusion 28

IV. PARICIPAION IN NONPARISAN POLIICAL ACIVIIES 29Conclusion 30

V. VOLUNARY ACIVIY IN HE COMMUNIY 31Conclusions 34

VI. PARICIPAION AND ACIVIY OF CIIZENS IN HECIVIL SOCIEY ORGANIZAIONS 35VI.1. Participation o citizens in civil society organizations 35VI.2. Ways o participation 37VI.3. Motivation or participation 39Conclusions 39

VII. CHARIY CONRIBUIONS 41VII.1. Participation o citizens in charity giving 41VII.2. Motivation 42Conclusions 44


4/68

VIII. OBJECIVES AND MECHANISMS OF CHARIYCONRIBUIONS 45VIII.1. Purpose o charitable contributions 45VIII.2. Mechanisms o charity giving 51

Conclusions 53IX. RANSPARENCY 55IX.1. Inormation on charity activities 55IX.2. Purposeul use o charitable contributions 56IX.3. Feedback 57Conclusions 58

Appendix 1. Questionnaire 59

Appendix 2. Sample structure 67


5/68

FOREWORD

In 2006 as part o our own orientation towards act-based planning (and advo-

cacy), MCIC has published the report rust and Charity Giving in Macedo-nia.

his year, the report has been divided into two separate parts on trust and civicresponsibility (including charity giving). he report on conidence in the civilsociety was published in October 2006 and soon aterwards we started the prep-arations or the survey on which this report is based.

he report is improved as a result o the last years experiences. he changes in-

clude the participation o citizens in non-partisan political activities, the activi-ties in the community and civil society organizations, but also the public spiritor respecting the legal obligations. In addition, we have introduced several in-dexes or monitoring citizens attitudes and habits on certain issues. he indexesshould acilitate the trend analysis.

With these methodological interventions, as well as the periodical replication othe report, we believe we have improved the useulness o this report.

Sao Klekovski


6/68


7/68

LIS OF ABBREVIAIONS

DPA: Democratic Party o Albanians

DUI: Democratic Union o Integration

ISPPI: Institute o Sociological, Political and Juridical Researches

MCIC: Macedonian Centre or International Cooperation

n.r.: not relevant

NSDP: New Social Democratic Party

PDP: Party or Democratic Prosperity

SDSM: Social Democratic Union o Macedonia

VMRO-DPMNE: Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization Democratic

Party or Macedonian National Unity

VMRO-NP: Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization National Party


8/68


9/68

EXECUIVE SUMMARY

Te report Social Responsibility o Citizens comes out o the need to examine theresponsibility o citizens in a broader sense. Te report gives an insight in the citizensattitudes about their responsibility or the crucial social issues, the legal, moral orideological responsibility o citizens towards the community and, in wider context,towards the society. In a ddition, several indicators illustrate the habits and actions ocitizens regarding certain issues. At the end, an overview is provided o the attitudes,motivation, situation and mechanisms o charity giving.

Te large number o variables allows us to see how the attitudes and statements arecorrelated with the social indicators, ethnical belonging or the region o residence.Tis also allows creating a prole o a citizen or the specic question which acilitatesthe urther analysis. Te report provides several such proles. In order to improve theusability o the report and to ensure urther analyses and comparisons several indexeswere developed, indicating the attitude o citizens regarding certain issue.

Te survey was conducted on a representative sample, which is an appropriatemethodology to examine the social responsibility o citizens.

Regarding the attitude on responsibility or social issues, the citizens still consider thestate as most responsible or meeting the social needs; there is an increased condencein solidarity, while the new development and the responsibility o the state areconsidered to be the solution or social problems. Te citizens have low awareness ortheir own civic responsibility and the need or their own participation. Tere is a gap inthe perception o responsibility, which is becoming wider rom the general to specicattitudes.

Majority o citizens (52.9%) believe that the state is most responsible or resolvingthe social problems. Te expectations rom the state are on the same level as last year.

Tis reects the etatistic culture (state socialism). Tere are no ideological dierencesregarding the role o state, citizens and private sector between the right-wing and le-wing supporters in Macedonia.

Te condence in solidarity o citizens in comparison with last year has increased rom26.4% to 39.3%.

Tere is a high consensus (92.1%) that the new development, employment andempowerment o citizens can be a resolution or the problems. otal o 74.9% o thecitizens believe in requesting responsibility rom the state and inuence on public

policies as a solution to social problems, while minority o citizens (38.9%) believe inthe social and humanitarian assistance. Tese attitudes can be used in avour o paying


10/68

0

more attention to the new development instead o social assistance.

Tere is a wide gap between the statements on civic responsibility and the concreteresponsibilities. While 88.7% o citizens believe they are responsible to respect the laws,the percentage decreases to 74.2% regarding the public spirit and ranges between 57.8%

and 80.8% regarding the responsibility or specic legal obligations (taxes, bills, etc.)Tis gap is probably even deeper in reality.

Despite the small improvement (tax collection), Macedonia has low to moderate levelo public spirit, maniested through justications or not paying taxes, public transport,communal services and requesting privileges rom the Government although there isno legal ground or that.

Te nonpartisan political activities o citizens are small with a downward trend.

Te voluntary activities in the community are halved as well as the readiness to dosomething more or the other people. Tis is the only case with gender dierences,indicating higher involvement o men. Te activity in community as male job, is apossible gender stereotype.

Tere is a moderate decline o involvement in civil society organizations, but thereis high unused potential o civil society organizations. In addition, there is a wide gapbetween the passive and active capacity o civil society organizations. Namely, only incases o known membership (including the payment o compulsory membership ee)

there is ten times dierence between the registered members and those saying theyare involved in their activities. Te most signicant is the change in the motivationor participation, rom the basic (new contacts, personal development) to the higherbenets (to support the community, the mission o the organization).

Te number o people that give charity has declined rom 75.5% last year to 64.6%this year. Te solidarity and sympathy are the main motives behind charity giving.Te main reason or not giving is that citizens do not have enough (10%). Te rstpriority or charity giving this year is aith communities. Money is the most requentdonation. Te usual amount is between 50 and 500 MKD. Te citizens preer to give

directly on hand or though SMS. Te inormation on charity events are most efcientlydisseminated through the electronic media. Tere is divided perception or thepurposeul use o donated means. otal o 53.2% o the respondents believe that thecollected contributions are used or the purpose. Te need or eedback on the usedassistance is the second priority or citizens (27.7%).


11/68

INDEXES

RESPONSIBILIY FOR RESOLVING HE SOCIAL PROBLEMS

State 52,9

Enterprises 2,2

Citizens 4,2

All together, the state, business (private) sector and citizens 33,9

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIY OF CIIZENS

Respect the laws/ legal obligations 88,7

Participate in political non-partisan activities 35,0

Participate in voluntary activities in the community 41,4

Participate in activities o the civil society organizations 40,3

Charity giving (give charity contributions) 51,1

Index o social responsibility o citizens 51,3

SOLIDARIY OF CIIZENS

Most people have high solidarity and are ready to help the people and thegroups in need

39,3

PUBLIC SPIRIEDNESS

It is not justiied to seek privileges rom the Government you are not entitled to 57,8

It is not justiied to avoid paying or the public transport 79,9

It is not justiied to avoid paying taxes 80,8

It is not justiied to avoid paying or the communal services 78,4

Index o public spirit 74,2 PARICIPAION OF CIIZENS IN POLIICAL NONPARISANACIVIIES

Wrote a letter to a newspaper 8,3

Signed a petition, reerendum 15,3

ook part in protests, rallies 22,4

Index o participation o citizens in political non-partisan activities 17,8

VOLUNARY ACIVIY IN HE COMMUNIY

Participation at meetings about community problems 18,3

Participation in voluntary activity or the benet o the community 12,8Index o voluntary activity in the community 15,6

PARICIPAION IN CIVIL SOCIEY ORGANIZAION

Index o participation in civil society organization 17,0

CHARIY GIVING

Index o charity giving 64,6


12/68

LEGEND

no or insignicant changes

No or insignicant changes = 0 3%

Slight = 3.01 5%

Moderate = 5.01 10%

Large = over 10%

slight increase

slight decrease

moderate increase moderate decrease

large increase

large decrease


13/68

I. INRODUCION

I.1. BACKGROUND

his report provides analysis o indings rom the survey Social Responsibilityo Citizens administered on a nationally representative sample o citizens o theRepublic o Macedonia.

he goal o the survey was to explore the responsibility o citizens about thesocial issues in Macedonia.

he Macedonian Center or International Cooperation (MCIC) has entrustedthe role o surveying the public opinion to the Institute or Sociological, Juridi-cal and Political Researches, which was also responsible or the applied meth-odology in the survey.

his survey is conducted or the second time. he irst one realized in April2006 was published in the booklet rust, Responsibility or Social Issues andCharity Giving in Macedonia. In 2006, parallel to this survey another one rust

in Civil Society was also perormed. In 2007, the latter survey was conductedseparately and was released in October 2007.

I.2. ERMS AND DEFINIIONS

he social responsibility may be legal, ethical, moral or based on aith or convic-tion (ideological). It can reer to the government (good governance), enterprises(social responsibility o enterprises) or the citizen (civic responsibility).

his survey is ocused on social responsibility o citizens in its broader sense. Itis constituted o two elements, the public spirit and civic responsibility or civicparticipation (Civicus, 2004).

Public spiritedness is an indicator o citizens support to the rule o law (imple-mentation o laws). he public spirit is measured through the support o payingtaxes, public transport, communal services and not asking or privileges romthe Government that one is not entitled to.


14/68

In the narrow sense, the social responsibility o citizens reers to the civic responsibility or civic participation. his is not a legal obligation, but ethical,moral or a conviction-based obligation. It is measured through non-partisanpolitical activities, voluntary activities in the community, participation in civil

society organizations and charitable contributions.

Nonpartisan political activities reer to activities such as writing letters to thenewspapers, signing petitions or participation at protests, which are not organ-ized by the political parties.

In Macedonia there is still no distinction between the terms philanthropy andcharity giving, or the use o dierent terms in Macedonian language such ascharity giving, beneaction and good will giving. his report ocuses on charitygiving as voluntary act o donating money or goods. he report makes a distinc-tion between philanthropy and charity giving. he widely accepted meaning ophilanthropy is a voluntary act o donating money or goods or providing othersupport or a charity cause, usually or a longer period o time. Furthermore,philanthropy is the tool o the private sector to trigger social change. With theconventional deinition on philanthropy, the donations are or narrowly deinedcause and they should contribute or visible change in the social circumstanc-es. o this end, usually large donations and inancial support is necessary on along run. he necessity or higher inancial commitment makes the distinctionbetween philanthropy and charity giving. hereore, the conventional use ophilanthropy reers to wealthy individuals and sometimes oundations (ortrusts) ounded by wealthy people. his distinction in Macedonia is not clearyet.

Voluntary activityreers to voluntary providing o personal avours, knowledgeand skills and/or perorming other activities or the beneit o other people,organs, organizations and other institutions, without any compensation (Lawon Voluntarism in the Republic o Macedonia). he term community reers to agroup o people living in a local area, such as municipality, neighbourhood unit,condominium council, etc.

Participation (involvement) in a civil society organization is membership (in-cluding the payment o membership ee), voluntary work (without compensa-tion); participation in activities; donating money.


15/68

I.3. INDEXES

In order to improve the usability o this report and to urther the opportunityor analysis and comparisons, several indexes (indicators) were developed in-

dicating the attitude o citizens on certain issues. In some cases the indexes aresimple and associated with only one attitude. For example, the solidarity index isthe sum o the responses to a single question most people have high solidarityand are ready to help the people and groups in need. Other indexes are complexand calculated by the mean value o the sum o responses to several questions.Some o the indexes are explained below, while the others are sel-explanatory.

he index o social responsibility o citizens is constituted o the responses ocitizens that they are responsible to respect the laws, participate in political non-

partisan activities, participate in meetings and activities or the beneit o thecommunity, in the civil society organizations and to give charity.

he index o public spirit covers the citizens attitudes that it is not justiied toavoid paying taxes, to avoid paying or the public transport and to seek privi-leges rom the Government that one is not entitled to.

he index o participation o citizens in political non-partisan activities includesthe participation in protests and rallies, signing petition or writing a letter to anewspaper.

he index o voluntary activity in the community relects the participation ocitizens in the activities or the beneit o the community, such as meetings,activities, etc.

he index o participation in civil society organization shows the active involve-ment o citizens in the work o these organizations, i.e. whether they pay themembership ee, take part in activities, work without compensation or donatemoney.

he index o charity giving indicates the contribution o citizens or charity(money, goods or charity work).


16/68

INDEXES OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILIY OF CIIZENS

Index o social responsibility = have responsibility

Index o solidarity= most people have high solidarity and areready to help the people and the groups inneed

Index o public spiritedness = never

Index o participation o citizens in politicalnon-partisan activities

= participate

Index o voluntary activity in the community= participate in meetings and activities/No. o activities

Index o participation in civil societyorganization

= involved

Index o charity giving = gave charity in the past 12 months

I.4. MEHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

he survey was carried out through interviews in the households in December2007 on a representative sample o 1,607 respondents.

QUESIONNAIRE

he questionnaires were the same one used in 2006, but were adjusted takinginto account the experiences rom the irst survey and by including the ques-tions rom CIVICUS research methodology Civil Society Index in Macedonia,reerring to the public spirit and participation o citizens in non-partisan po-litical activities, civil society organizations and the community in general. hequestions were developed by the authors and MCIC project team in cooperationwith ISPPIs experts.

For the purpose o the survey, the questionnaire covered the ollowing vari-ables:

Public spiritedness (obeying the legal obligations) o citizens; Participationo citizens in non-partisan political activities;

Voluntary activity o citizens in the community;

Participation and activity in civil society organizations;

Charity giving o citizens;

Socio-demographic characteristics.


17/68

SAMPLE

he poll was carried out in December 2007 on a representative sample o 1,607respondents. he population o the sample was comprised o citizens older than18 years o age, while representation criteria included: gender, ethnical belong-

ing, age, place o residence and regions. Attention was also paid on employmentstatus, education level, monthly income per household member and political a-iliation. he citizens were also asked whether they are members o civil societyorganizations.

Out o 1,607 surveyed citizens, 49.4% were women, while 50.6% were men. Re-garding the ethnical representation, 65% were Macedonians, 23.6% were Alba-nians, while 11.4% were rom the other ethnical groups. Regarding the placeo residence, 40.3% live in rural, while 59.8% in urban areas (21.5% in Skopje).

Please see Appendix 2 or urther inormation on the sample structure.

FINDINGS

All collected data were processed using the requency and proportion o an-swers. he probability is 95% with a margin o error o +/- 5%.

he indings on the whole sample are presented in graphs, ollowed by num-bers.

In addition, the indings about the trends in comparison with pervious surveysconducted in 2004 and 2006 are provided, when the data were comparable. helegend o the used symbols is provided in the executive summary.

he executive summary also provides an overview o the most important ind-ings and trends. he indexes were used to improve the data analysis.

he report uses the term insigniicant minority or answers provided by less

than 10% o the sample, small minority rom 11-30%, minority rom 30-50%,majority rom 51-70% and large majority or over 70%.

WORKING GROUP

MCIC has included some o its sta in all stages o the research: Sao Klekovs-ki, Aleksandar Kralovski, Gonce Jakovleska, Sunica Sazdovska and DanielaStojanova. he ISPPIs team included: Nataa Gaber-Damjanovska, Emilija Si-movska, Aneta Jovevska, Klime Babunski and Petar Atanasov.


18/68


19/68

II. RESPONSIBILIY FOR SOCIAL ISSUES

he beginning o the survey on social responsibility o citizens is ocused on ex-ploring the attitudes o citizens regarding the allocation o responsibility amongthe state, business and civic sector, ollowed by the responsibility o citizens, al-truism, the ways to resolve the social needs and the ways o civic participation.

II.1. RESPONSIBILIY FOR SOCIAL ISSUES AND

ALRUISM

We examined the attitude on allocation o responsibility or resolving the socialissues among the three sectors: state, business and civic sector.

he highest are the expectations rom the state (52.9%) and they are as high aslast year. his is ollowed by the expectation or shared responsibility o threesectors (33.9%), while the expectations rom the citizens and enterprises (busi-ness sector) to assume responsibility or the social issues are lower.

Graph II. 1. 1.

Who is most responsible to support the citizens in resolving their socialneeds?

he proile o those supporting the responsibility o various actors is relative-ly homogenous. Higher expectations rom the state can be ound among the

armers (75.6%) and citizens that have not completed the primary education

52.9 ()

All together, the state, businesssector and citizens

State

Citizens

Enterprises

No attitude

33.9

4.2 ()

2.2 ()

6.8 ()


20/68

0

(74.3%). he support or the responsibility o citizens and shared responsibil-ity increases with the rise in monthly income (e.g. the support or the sharedresponsibility rises rom 24.4% to 41.7% rom the lowest to the highest income).DUI and PDP supporters have highest expectations rom the state (70.5%, and

72% respectively), while LDP supporters mostly believe in shared responsibility(50%). he members and employees o the civil society organizations do notdeviate rom the general attitude.

Graph II. 1. 2.Attitude on altruism (unselish support)

People are only concerned or themselves and are not interested in the others,community and the state is the attitude o 45.7% o citizens. his attitude hasdeclined or 15.4% in comparison with last year, unlike the conidence in peo-ples solidarity which has risen rom 26.4% to 39.3%.

here is also high homogeneity in the attitudes on solidarity, with small varia-tions. he ethnic Albanians (48.8%), people rom Polog region (59.6%) and

DPA ollowers (66.3%) are in support o this attitude. he key variations comeout o the economic-social dierences. he conidence in solidarity increasesrom those without primary education (25.7%), towards those with high edu-cation (45.3%), similarly as it increases with the income - rom 29.6% amongthose with lowest income to 59.3% among those with highest income.

39,3

ake care only o themselves and are not

interested in the others, the community and

the country

Have high solidarity and are ready to helpthe people and the groups in need

Dont know

45.7 ()

15.0 ()

39.3 ()


21/68

II.2. WAYS OF RESOLVING HE SOCIAL ISSUES

he citizens were asked about their attitude on how the social issues can besolved.

Graph II. 2.1.Social issues can be solved by:

New development, employment and empowerment o the citizens is seen as a wayor resolving the social issues by a vast majority (92.1%), similarly as requestingresponsibility rom the state and inluence on the public policy (74.9%). otalo 38.9% expect the social issues to be solved by providing social-humanitarianassistance, contrary to more people (46.5%) that do not expect this.

he attitudes are homogeneous and dierences occur only in education level.hose with uncompleted primary education (45.7%) believe more in the so-cial-humanitarian assistance, in comparison with those with higher education

(34.1%). hose with high education believe in new development (93.3%) andincreasing the responsibility o the state and inluence on public policy (78.2%),contrary to those without primary education (71.4% i.e. 57.1%).

New development, employment andempowerment o citizens

Requesting responsibility rom thestate and inuence on public policies

Social and humanitarian assistanceor the groups in need

92.1

74.9

38.9


22/68

II.3. PARICIPAION OF CIIZENS

Graph II. 3.1.Citizens are responsible to:

he citizens eel least responsible to get involved in political non-partisan ac-tivities (35%) and highest responsibility to respect the laws (88.7%). here isa relative homogeneity regarding the demographic and socio-economic char-acteristics. Small dierences in attitudes occur as a result o the age, i.e. theyounger have higher support than older people. he participation in voluntaryactivities in the state is mostly supported by the people rom 18 to 25 years(49.4%), and is least supported by those over 65 years (29.8%). his is similar tothe participation in the civil society organizations (46.9%, against 31%) and theother responsibilities o citizens.

Respect the laws/ legal obligations

Charity giving (give charity contributions)

Participate in voluntaryactivities in the community

Participate in activities o thecivil society organizations

Participate in politicalnon-partisan activities

88.7

51.1

41.4

40.3

35.0


23/68

CONCLUSIONS

1. he state is still most responsible or resolving the social issues

Majority citizens (52.9%) ind the state as most responsible or resolving thesocial issues. he expectations rom the state are on the last years level.

High expectations rom the state, lower expectations rom the citizens and al-most no expectations rom the business sector are in avour o the etatistic cul-ture, as a residue o the state socialism i.e. low public support or organizingMacedonia as liberal-democratic constitutional system. he low support or adierent order in Macedonia is relected in the lack o ideological dierencesregarding the role o the state, citizens and private sector, between the rightistand letist supporters in Macedonia.

2. Increased conidence in solidarity

he conidence in solidarity o citizens has increased rom 26.4% last year to39.3% this year. Still those with uncompleted primary education have least con-idence (25.7%), probably as they are sel-perceived victims o the reluctance oothers to take care o them. Although there is still an educational-social gap, anincrease in the level o conidence in solidarity is observed even among thosewith lowest education (rom 15.8% to 25.7%).

3. New development and requesting responsibility rom the state resolutionor social issues

here is a high consensus (92.1%) that the new development, employment andempowerment o citizens will bring resolution or social issues. hose with un-completed primary education (71.4%) least agree with this attitude, probably asthey perceive themselves as group in need.

otal o 74.9% o respondents believe in requesting responsibility rom the stateand inluence on public policies, while minority o citizens (38.9%) believe insocial and humanitarian assistance as resolution or social problems.

hese attitudes may support the eorts or paying more attention on the newdevelopment instead on social aid.


24/68


25/68

o avoid paying taxes

80.8 ()18.0 ()

1.2 ()

79.9 ()

18.7 ()1.4 ()

78.4 ()19.2 ()

2.4 ()

57.8 ()

32.7 ()9.5 ()

o avoid paying orthe public transport

o avoid paying or thecommunal services

o seek privileges rom the

Governmentyou are not entitled to

Always Sometimes Never

III. PUBLIC SPIRIEDNESS

he support to the rule o law or public spiritedness was researched throughour questions.

Graph III. 1.Justiication o the avoidance to pay taxes, public transport, communalservices and requesting privileges that one is not entitled to

Large majority o citizens support the paying o taxes (80.8%), public transport(79.9%) and communal services (78.4%). he support or the taxes has slightlyincreased in comparison with 2004.

Smaller support, although still coming rom majority o citizens (57.8%) is notto seek privileges rom the Government as there is no legal ground or this. Inthis area, increased number o citizens believes they should ask or privilegesrom the Government although they are not entitled to them.

he public spirit, i.e. the support is homogeneous. here is less support amongthose with primary education, in the area o paying taxes (65.2%) and request-ing privileges rom the Government (43.5%).

A link has not been established between the public spirit and the social-eco-nomic status i.e. the amount o monthly income.


26/68


27/68


28/68

argumenti.CONCLUSION

1. Few nonpartisan political activities o citizens

he citizens participate in ew non-partisan political activities and this is a de-clining trend.

he members o the civil society organizations participate in more activities,which may be a sign o organizing non-partisan political activities by the civilsociety organizations (inluence on public policies).

In the past period, ethnic Albanians, especially DUI, DPA and PDP supportershave participated more in the protests. he connection with the political partysailiation speaks more in avour o the partisan than non-partisan activities.


29/68

V. VOLUNARY ACIVIY IN HECOMMUNIY

Signiicant part o the social responsibility o citizens is the voluntary activityin the community, including meetings where the problems o the community(municipality, neighbourhood unit, condominium council, etc.) are discussed,

voluntary participation in activity or the beneit o the community (e.g. streetcleaning) or helping to other people in the community without compensation.

In comparison with the previous survey on this topic (2004), the impression othe respondents is that collective activities in the community have been halved.Namely, 26.6% are inormed that meetings have been held in their municipality(contrary to 44.3% our years ago), while 22.8% (47.1% in 2004) know about the

voluntary activities organized or the beneit o their community.

Graph V. 1.Familiarity with collective activities in the community

) Meetings

Dont know34% ()

Yes27% ()

No39% ()


30/68

0

b) Voluntary activities

More men (31%) than women (21%) are inormed about the voluntary meet-ings and activities. here are no signiicant dierences regarding the age (mid-dle aged people between 30 and 50 years are more active than the younger andolder people), ethnical or party belonging, household income and place o resi-dence. here are dierences among the housewives, which are least inormed

(10%), partially among the armers and unemployed (under 20%), while theemployees in the civil society organizations are most likely to attend the eventsin their community (70%). here is a signiicant dierence regarding the educa-tion least inormed are those with uncompleted primary education (11%), ol-lowed by those with primary education (18%), which are well below the averageo 26%. he most inormed are those with high education (36%).

Signiicantly reduced is the personal participation at meetings (18.3%, against26.5%) and particularly in voluntary activities (12.8% against 32.6% in 2004).

In line with the amiliarity is the participation in the activities - 23% men, against13% women participated at meetings, while 16% men, against 9% women wereinvolved in voluntary activities. Because o the general decline o participationin voluntary activities, the dierences are smaller having in mind the eatureso the sample. Again there is constantly low level o participation among thosewithout primary education, while it is signiicant that armers (only or meet-ings) and housewives are discouraged to continue the participation ater theirst time. Regarding the political ailiation, there are dierent responses, butthe constantly highest level o participation is among DUI supporters.

Dont know28% ()

Yes23% ()

No49% ()


31/68

Graph V. 2.Participation o citizens in activities and meetings in the community

he reduced voluntarism is relected in the readiness or personal engagementor providing any assistance to the other people without compensation. Minorityo respondents (40.8%) said they are ready to help, while large majority (74.1%)gave this statement in the past survey. Most o them (25.5% o all respondents,

i.e. 62.5% o those that answered positively), were involved less than 4 hours ina period o one month.

It is interesting to see there is higher solidarity in the large towns (above 50,000residents), but not in Skopje (below the average). here is higher readiness tohelp the others among NSDP, DUI and DPA supporters, and surprisingly high,in comparison with the other responses, is the personal engagement withoutcompensation in Pelagonija region (75%) and the low readiness (19%) in south-eastern region.

Tere were noactivities/ meetings

49.1 ()

Once

16.7 ()

Several times

6.0 ()

Many times

7.1 ()

I didnt participate

(dont know)

5.2 ()

9.0 ()

1.6 ()

2.2 ()

38.1 ()

65.1 ()

MeetingsActivities


32/68

CONCLUSIONS

1. Halved voluntary activities

With 26.6% respondents that are amiliar with the meetings held in their mu-nicipality (against 44.3% our years ago) and 22.8% (47.1% in 2004) that areaware o the voluntary activities or the beneit o the wider community in theirmunicipality, there is a tendency or signiicant decline o voluntary activities incommunities and the readiness o people to do something more or the others(outside the amily or them personally).

Majority o the people that are amiliar with the community-based activitiessaid they have personally participated (69% in meetings and 56% in voluntaryactivities), although the participation is signiicantly reduced (or the meetings18.3%, against 26.5% in 2004 and particularly or voluntary activities 12.8% incomparison with 32.6% previously).

2. Activities in the community male job, possible gender stereotype

In comparison with the answers to the other questions in the survey, whereno gender dierences were noted, the participation in the communal activi-ties (meetings o condominium council, neighbourhood units, municipalitiesas well as voluntary activities or the beneit o the wider community) is seen as

male job (10% more men are inormed and participated at the meetings, and 7%more men participated in activities).


33/68

VI. PARICIPAION AND ACIVIY OFCIIZENS IN HE CIVIL SOCIEYORGANIZAIONS

he civil society organizations are usually considered as voluntary. Sometimeseven the sector is called under that name. But, to what extent are citizens in-

volved in their activities?

VI.1. PARICIPAION OF CIIZENS IN CIVIL SOCIEY

ORGANIZAIONS

Only 17% i.e. small minority o respondents said they were involved in the worko any civil society organizations. his is moderate decline in comparison with2004 (membership o 22.9% according to the survey Community Sample tak-en rom Civicus Civil Society Index in Macedonia) although the respondentsbelieve their participation has increased (5.8%, against 2.4% that stated the op-posite).

Graph VI. 1.1.

Participation in the work o the civil society organizations

Yes17%

No83%

More than a ourth were involved in the work o churches and aith communi-ties (particularly the ethnic Albanians, and among them there are three timesmore supporters o DUI, in comparison with DPA and PDP), while the involve-

ment in some o the other groups (sport/hobby, trade unions, health, democ-racy, old people, environment and others) is around 1%. his is in accordance


34/68

with the question about the importance o each o these groups or the respon-dents. Again, the aith communities with 3.6% are in the lead, and they are theonly one with increase in comparison with the previous period, ollowed by thelocal civil society organizations with 2.1%. here is a signiicant decline among

the organizations dealing with women and gender issues in comparison with2004.

able VI. 1.1.Participation o citizens in civil society organizations by sectors

SECOR 2007

Churches and religious communities 4.7 %

Democracy, human rights and rule o law 0.9 %

Children, youth, students 0.7 %Ethnic communities 0 %

Women and gender issues 0 %

Environment and nature 0.9 %

Health 1.1 %

Inormation 0 %

Culture and art 0 %

People with special needs 0.6 %

Proessional associations 0 %

Non-violence and tolerance 0 %

Education and science 0 %

Civil society development 0.8 %

Rural development 0.8 %

rade unions 1.2 %

Social and humanitarian 0.8 %

Sport, hobby and recreation 1.4 %

Old people 0.9 %

Other 2.1 %

otal 16.9%

Similarly as with the voluntarism, there is a lower participation in the worko civil society organizations among the housewives (5%), unemployed andpeople with low income (6-10%) and armers (10%), and particularly amongthose without primary education (only 3% and these are exclusively involved inreligious organizations). he involvement o the people living in the villages is


35/68


36/68

VI.3. MOIVAION FOR PARICIPAION

On the other hand, there is a signiicant change in the motivation o citizensor getting involved in the activities o the civil society organizations. o the

question why these organizations matter to them, hal o the respondents saidbecause o their mission (4.4% o all respondents, i.e. 30% o those involved intheir work) or the beneit or the community (3.3% i.e. 22%). In the perviousperiod (2004), the most important reason or joining these organizations wasthe possibility or employment (providing additional income or other personalgains) and personal development (new knowledge, experience).

Graph VI.3.1.Motive or participation o citizens in the civil society organizations

hese motives are more likely among men (or women the dominant reason isthe personal development 3.3% o all respondents, i.e. 26% o those participat-ing in the work o civil society organizations).

he young people are more active because o the socialization (meeting newpeople) and personal development (total o 9% younger than 25), while the

leaders o the change are the middle aged citizens (rom 30 to 50 years, with 9-12% rom the total o 17% that are active in civil society organizations).

Because their mission iscomplementary to my belies

4.4

Because they help mycommunity

0.6For the opportunity to havegood reputation and respect

(sel-realization)

3.3

Because I provide additionalincome and other personal

gains rom the organization

1.1

For personal development 2.9

Because o the opportunityor socialization (to meet new

people, to hang out with them,etc.)

2.7


37/68

CONCLUSIONS

1. Moderate decline o participation o citizens in civil society organizations

here is decline in the participation o citizens in the work o civil society or-ganizations or 5.9%. his decline is evident throughout the sector (mostly inwomen and health organizations), except or the religious communities.

he citizens are mostly involved in the activities and the voluntary work, andless by paying the membership ee and donating money.

2. Unused capacity (potential) o civil society organizations

here is a wide gap between the passive and active capacity o civil society or-

ganizations. Namely, only in cases o known membership (including the com-pulsory membership ee) there is ten times dierence between the registeredmembers and those stating that participate in the activities.

For instance, the Federation o Associations o Retired Persons has over 220,000registered members, which represents 10% o the population in Macedonia,while only 0.9% o the surveyed spoke o their activity in the organizations oold people. his is similar in the trade unions and proessional associations(doctors, judges, prosecutors, etc.)

3. Changed motivation or participation in the work o civil society organizations

he activity o the citizens in the civil society organizations moderately declines(5%). he most signiicant is the change in the motivation or involvement romthe basic (new contacts, personal development) towards the higher beneits(help or the community, mission o the organizations).


38/68


39/68

VII. CHARIY CONRIBUIONS

Charitable contributions are surveyed through 15 questions. he responses tomost o them were comparable with those in the survey on charity giving con-ducted in 2006. he indings describe the habits o the citizens o the Republico Macedonia or charity giving.

VII.1. PARICIPAION OF CIIZENS IN CHARIY GIVING

In the past 12 months, the Albanians regularly or occasionally gave more (74.7%)than Macedonians (63.5%). he members o the civil society organizations gave86.4%, while the students although did not give, would like to do so (37.3%).he people over 65 neither give nor would they like to give.

he percentage o those giving regularly or occasionally is increasing with thelevel o education, rom 2.9% i.e. 40% o those with uninished primary educa-tion, to 16.2% i.e. 59.2% or those with college and university education. And

vise versa, the percentage declines in the negative attitude rom 22.9% i.e. 34.3%o those without primary education to 18.4% i.e. 6.10% or those with high edu-cation.

he percentage o charity givers increases with the rise in monthly income perhousehold member rom 4.5% t 22.2% (or regular) and, vise versa, declinesor the last attitude rom 15.5% or those with monthly income o 2.000 MKDt 1.9% or those with over 12.000 MKD monthly income.

Most people give occasionally in Pelagonija region (71.6%), while least in Var-dar region 36.5% and southeastern 42.4%.


40/68

0

Graph VII. 1.1.Charitable contributions in 2007

VII.2. MOIVAION

he number o those that generally give has been reduced to 64.6% in compari-

son with last year (83.2%). he number o those that give because they thinkthat people should support each other has been reduced or 11.3%. Also, thepercentage o those that give o sympathy has declined rom 21.2% to 18.2%.

People over 65 years (23.8%), unemployed (25.2%), armers (22%) and citizenso southeast (26.4%) and southwest (22.5%) region are least likely to believe inthe attitude that people should support each other.

Members o civil society organizations (56.2%), employees in the public sector

(50.2%) and citizens rom Polog region (46.9%) are most likely to believe in thisattitude.

his support grows with the level o education, rom 20% among those with un-completed primary education to 48.9% among those with high education. hesimilar is the case having in mind the monthly income per household member,where the support increases rom 26.1% among those with income up to 2,000MKD, to 61.1% among those with income over 12,000 MKD.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

%

Yes, several times

54.8 ()

No, but I would give

Yes, regularly almost each monthand in every action

No, and I wouldnt give

26.3

9.8 ()

9.1


41/68


42/68

Graph VII. 2.2.Reasons or not giving charity

CONCLUSIONS

1. Number o people that give declined rom 75.5% last year, to 64.6% thisyear

Although the percentage o those that give regularly has increased rom 8.3%last year to 9.8% this year, the total number o charity givers has declined. his

suggests that the level o charity giving has deteriorated or 10.9% in compari-son with 2006.

2. Solidarity and sympathy are the main motives or charity giving o citizens

People mostly give because they think they should support each other (36.3%)or o pity (18.2%). he main reason or not giving is the act they do not haveenough or themselves (10%).

I give

64.6 ()

I dont have enough or mysel(I need assistance)

10.0 ()

I want to give, but I dont know how 4.2 ()

I dont believe to anyone,Im suspicious about abuses

4.0 ()

Im not inormed howthis money is used

2.9 ()

Everyone should

take care o onesel2.9 ()

I dont believe this is eective 2.2 ()

Im not sure whetherthey really need it

2.1

Other 1.5 ()


43/68

VIII. OBJECIVES AND MECHANISMS

OF CHARIY CONRIBUIONS

VIII.1. PURPOSE OF CHARIABLE CONRIBUIONS

he citizens o Macedonia mostly give or humanitarian purposes and helpingpoor people.

Employees in the public sector (44.8%), citizens living in towns with more than50,000 residents (51.4%), members o the civil society organizations (46.6%),citizens rom Polog (51.2%) and Pelagonija (57.4%) regions are among thosethat are most likely to give or humanitarian assistance and to help the poor.

he least likely to give or humanitarian purposes, helping poor people andor the treatment o sick people are those with uncompleted primary educa-tion 14.3% i.e. 5.7%. hey mostly give or construction o religious acilitiesand support o aith communities (22.9%). Few people living in towns with up

to 15,000 residents, as well as citizens rom the eastern (18.7%) and southeast(16%) region give or humanitarian purposes.

he charity giving or the irst purpose increases with the rise in household in-come, rom 25.4% among those with income up to 2.000 MKD, to 47.2% amongthose with income over 12,000 MKD, i.e. 48% among those with income rom9.001 to 12.000 MKD. he ethnic Albanians are more likely to give or construc-tion o religious acilities (16.1%) in comparison with Macedonians (4%).


44/68

Graph VIII. 1.1.Purpose o charity giving in 2007

he religious communities are the irst priority or charity giving o Macedo-nian citizens, ollowed by the health and social care. In comparison with previ-ous year, the charity giving or the aith communities has increased or 10.8%,or health has declined or 3.4%, while or social care has increased or 3.9%.Giving or children, young people and people with special needs has also de-clined or 2.3% i.e. 0.8%.

he Macedonians would most likely to give or the health (20.6%) and social

care (17%), while ethnic Albanians or religious communities (26.4%) and chil-dren, young people and students (15.6%).

he true supporters o religious communities are housewives (35.5%), thosewithout primary education (28.6%), citizens rom towns with over 50,000 resi-dents (29.4%), citizens with lowest income (24.4%) and citizens rom northeast(30.1%) and southwest (45.1%) region.

On the other hand, the citizens rom Vardar region would never give or theaith communities, the support in the southeast region is 3.5%, while in the

eastern region is 4.8%. he citizens rom northeast region would mostly give tochildren, young people and students (23.5%).

Humanitarian assistance,helping poor people

34.8

reatment o sick people 16.3

Construction o religious acilitiesand support to aith communities

7.0

Te eeling to help one another, solidarity 6.8

Other 0.9

Improving the lie in thelocal community, inrastructure 0.4

Helping schools 0.3

Supporting the sport activities 0.2

I didnt give 29.3


45/68

Citizens with highest income would mostly give or the social care (17.6%).

he charity giving or health is among the priority o 39.6% o citizens romVardar region, 27.1% o citizens o the eastern region, while the persons with

special needs is priority or charity giving or 25.7% o citizens o southeast,30.1% o eastern and 23.9% o Pelagonija region.

Citizens with uncompleted primary education would least give or health (5.7%)and people with special needs (2.9%).

able VIII. 1.2.Priority areas or charity giving

FIELD/ PRIORIY 1 2 3

Churches and aith communities 17.5 7.7 4.4

Democracy, human rights and rule o law 2.6 3.0 1.7

Children, young people, students 11.2 11.8 8.8

Ethnic communities 0.5 1.4 0.8

Women and gender issues 0.9 1.8 1.8

Environment and nature 1.4 2.8 3.6

Health 16.7 15.6 9.1

Culture and art 0.4 2.1 2.4

People with special needs 12.7 12.5 11.1Non-violence and tolerance 1.2 1.7 3.6

Education and science 1.2 3.0 5.5

Old people 3.4 8.7 9.7

Civil society development 0.7 0.9 2.2

Patriotic 0.3 0.5 1.4

Rural development 2.7 2.4 2.9

Social care (humanitarian) 15.6 11.8 13.3

Sport, hobby and recreation 1.7 1.7 4.5

Does not give 9.3 9.3 9.3

No other priority 1.4 3.8

As in the previous year, o highest priority is the charity giving on local level, i.e.in the surroundings where people live, while the second priority is the munici-pality. While these two priorities have increased in comparison with last year,the others have declined.


46/68


47/68

Graph VIII. 1.4.What do citizens give?

Goods16% ()

Charity work4% ()

I didnt give36% ()

Money44% ()

Most o the citizens gave total o 500 MKD, which is or 2.1% more than in theprevious year. he number o those giving rom 501 to 1,000 MKD, as well asthe other options, is declining.

he armers were least likely to give up to 500 MKD, while citizens o townswith over 50,000 residents are most likely to give 500 MKD (36.9%) as well ascitizens rom Polog region (59.1%).

Graph VIII. 1.6.Amount o charitable contributions (money and goods) in 2007

Up to 500 MKD 26.3 ()

501 - 1000 MKD

1001 - 2000 MKD

2001 - 5000 MKD

5001 - 10.000 MKD

Over 10.000 MKD

I didnt give

Dont know

11.2 ()6.8 ()

3.4 ()

2.1 ()

1.3 ()

36.4 ()12.4 ()


48/68

According to the indings, the citizens mostly give over 500 MKD 13.3% orrom 50 to 100 MKD 12.6%. In comparison with the previous year, this is anincrease or 6.7%. he other donations have declined in comparison with theprevious survey.

Graph VIII.1.3.I you gave money, how much did you give?

VIII.2. MECHANISMS OF CHARIY GIVING

he mechanisms o giving may acilitate or impede the charity giving. his iswhy it is very important which mechanism will be chosen. he citizens preerto give on hand, or rom door to door. his type o giving was prioritized by49% o respondents, which is 14.5% higher than last year. he most requent

second priority is giving through short text messages-SMS, which is a changein comparison with the previous year when the second priority was giving on abank account.

Over 500 MKD 13.3 ()

50 - 100 MKD

100 - 500 MKD

10 - 50 MKD

Petty cash, less than 10 MKD

I didnt give money

I didnt give anything

12.6 ()

8.2 ()

7.5 ()

2.2 ()

19.8 ()36.4 ()


49/68

Graph VIII. 2.1.Mechanisms o charity giving

Ethnic Albanians preer to give on hand, i.e. rom door to door (71%), un-like the Macedonians (40.6%). his percentage is higher or the respondentswho have not completed primary education (65.2%). he armers (56.1%) andhousewives (66.9%), those living in the villages (59.4%) as well as the respon-dents rom Polog region (69.1%) preer to give on hand.

More than hal o the respondents preer to give directly (58.7%). From the in-termediaries, they would rather choose the churches and aith communities(24.6%), which is increase or 18.6% in comparison with last year. Furthermore,the citizens would like to give through the Macedonian Red Cross or a publicinstitution (hospital).

I they should choose an intermediary, the armers would pick the church(31.7%), while the employees in the civil society organizations would choose acivil society organization as intermediary (20%). he citizens rom Pelagonija

region mostly like to give directly to the beneiciaries (72.2%), while those romVardar region are least likely to do so (30.2%).

From door to door (on hand)

49.0 ()

On bank account (bank order)

7.5 ()

ele-donation (SMS, phone call)

14.5 ()

In a charity box

18.8 ()

Buying lottery ticket /bingo

12.4 ()

Credit card

20.8 ()

I dont give

11.9 ()

By buying services (concerts, etc)

18.8 ()

By buying objects (auction, store)

2.5 ()

By buying branded products

6.0 ()

2.4 ()7.6 ()

1.0 ()4.4 ()

0.7 ()1.7 ()

0.3 ()2.8 ()

5.45.4

Priority 1Priority 2


50/68

0

Graph VIII. 2.2.Preerred intermediaries or charity giving

o avoid abuse and to see whom I am giving to, is the answer o majority orespondents to the question why do you preer to give directly.

he employees in the public sector are mostly araid o abuse (46%) and this iswhy they want to give directly. hose with higher income (50.9% o those withincome over 12,000 MKD) are also more araid o abuse.

Directly to the beneciary

58.7 ()

Church and aith community

Macedonian Red Cross

Public institution (hospital, school)

Civil society organization

Neighborhood unit or municipality

International organization

Macedonian Centre or InternationalCooperation (MCIC)

I dont give

12.3 ()13.0 ()

24.6 ()

7.7 ()17.7 ()

6.3 ()11.9 ()

3.1 ()7.3 ()

2.9 ()

9.3 ()2.6 ()4.3 ()

0.41.6

5.45.4

Priority 2

Priority 1


51/68

Graph VIII. 2.3.Reasons or direct charity giving

CONCLUSIONS

1. he irst priority or charity giving this year are the aith communities

For 17.5% o citizens, the aith communities are priority or charity giving,contrary to the priorities in 2006 - health (20.1%), children and young people(13.5%), and persons with special needs (13.5%).

2. Money is mostly given. he usual amount is up to 50 MKD and above 500MKD

People preer to give money (43.8%). According to the responses, the amount ocharitable contributions increased rom 10-100 MKD in 2006 to over 500 MKDin 2007. Unortunately, the voluntary work is still at the bottom o the list, withurther decline rom 6.2% in 2006 to 3.9%.

3. Citizens preer to give directly, on hand

Citizens mostly like to give on hand, or rom door to door (49%), then by SMS(20.8%). An increased percentage o citizens want to give on hand (34.5% in2006) or directly (58.7%), without the intermediaries (53% in 2006). his is con-trary to the attitude o 35% o the respondents, who ear abuse and the attitudeo 27.7% who expect eedback on the used assistance. he number o those whowould chose a civil society organization as their intermediary is still very small,now it is (3.1%) which is similar to the one in 2006 (2.8%). Besides the ear oraud, the citizens (34.1%) want to see whom the assistance is given.

o avoid abuse 35.0 ()

I want to see whom I give 34.1 ()

I wouldnt give directly 12.5 ()

I want him/her to see who is giving 6.3 ()

I want to see the gratitude personally 3.3 ()

I wouldnt give at all 4.8

No answer 3.9 ()


52/68


53/68

Electronic media 30.1 ()

Directly rom beneciaries 28.3 ()

Friends and neighbors 15.7 ()

Im not inormed 9.8

Printed media 8.0 ()

Church and aith community 5.7 ()

Letters and yer 0.8 ()

No answer 1.7

IX. RANSPARENCY

IX.1. INFORMAION ON CHARIY ACIVIIES

he electronic media are still the most eicient in disseminating inormationon charitable activities, although the direct communication (inormation) can-not be neglected

he electronic media (30.1%) and beneiciaries (28.3%) are sources o inorma-tion or the Macedonians, while the ethnic Albanians mostly receive inorma-tion rom the neighbours and riends (31.9%).

hose with income over 12,000 MKD usually get inormation rom the elec-tronic media (43.5%) as well as those rom Vardar region (46.9%), while thoserom Polog region mostly get inormation rom riends and neighbours 37.8%.

Graph IX.1.1.

Way o inormation on charity activities


54/68

IX.2. PURPOSEFUL USE OF CHARIABLE CONRIBU

IONS

One o the requently asked questions regarding the charity giving is how these

means are spent. Although the opinion regarding the purposeul use o charitydonations is divided, there is an increase o 7.7% in comparison with last yearthat ully agree with the statement that charitable contributions collected bythe citizens are strictly used or the purpose, while the number o those think-ing that these means are always abused has declined (or 6.2%).

hose with uncompleted primary education are least likely (17.1%) to believethat the means are used purposeully. his percentage increases with the levelo education up to 42.7% among those with advanced and high education. And

vise versa, those with uncompleted primary education are most likely to thinkthat charitable contributions are partially abused (28.6%), while the percentagedeclines with the increased education level, up to 6.8% or those with secondaryeducation and 7.8% o those with advanced and high education.

Citizens living in towns with more than 50,000 residents are more inclined tobelieve that charitable contributions are used or the purpose (54.5%). hosewith monthly income less than 2,000 MKD are least likely to believe that chari-table contributions are used or the purpose (27.1%).

Across the regions, citizens rom southwest (71.8%) and northeast region(53.7%) mostly believe that charitable contributions are mainly used or thepurpose. Least likely to believe in this attitude are people rom Vardar region(16.7%). Not a single citizen rom this region believes that the charitable con-tributions are always used purposeully. he citizens rom the eastern regionmostly believe that charitable contributions are partially abused (50.6%), whilethe citizens rom Vardar region mostly believe in the attitude that charitablecontributions are always abused (41.7%).


55/68

Graph IX.2.1.Purposeul use o charitable contributions

Tey are mainlyused or the

purpose41%

No answer1%

Tey are alwaysabused8%

Yes, always13%

Tey are partiallyabused

37%

IX.3. FEEDBACK

Majority o citizens believe that those that give should not get anything in re-turn because the act o giving is sel-ulilling. In comparison with the previousyear, this is an increase o 22%. he least likely to agree with this attitude are thecitizens with uncompleted primary education (54.3%) and those rom Vardarregion (50%). hose that are most likely to agree with this attitude are livingin a town with more than 50,000 residents (74.9%), with monthly income perhousehold member over 12,000 MKD and those rom Pelagonija (86.9%) andnortheast region (74.3%).

Feedback on the used means is mostly required by the citizens rom Vardarregion 22.9%.


56/68


57/68


58/68

APPENDIX 1. QUESIONNAIREhe responses are presented in percentages (%)

1. Who is responsible or resolving the social problems?

State 52.9

Enterprises 2.2

Citizens 4.2

All together. the state. business (private) sector and citizens 33.9

No attitude 6.8

2. Te citizens are responsible to: Yes No

Respect the laws/ legal obligations 88.7 4.2

Participate in political non-partisan activities 35.0 44.9

Participate in voluntary activities in the community 41.4 39.8

Participate in activities o the civil society organizations 40.3 42.2

Charity giving (give charity contributions) 51.1 36.0

3. Social needs (problems) can be solved with: Yes No

Social and humanitarian assistance or the groups in need 38.9 46.5

New development. employment and empowerment o citizens 92.1 3.2

Requesting responsibility o the state and inuence on public policies 74.9 12.4

4. Most people:

Have high solidarity and are ready to help the people and the groups in need 39.3

ake care only o themselves and are not interested in the others. the community andthe country

45.7

Dont know 15.0

5. In your opinion. how justied is: Always Sometimes Never

o seek privileges rom the Government you are notentitled to

9.5 32.7 57.8

o avoid paying or the public transport 1.4 18.7 79.9

o avoid paying taxes 1.2 18.0 80.8

o avoid paying or the communal services 2.4 19.2 78.4

6. In the past 12 months. how ofen didyou take part/practice the ollowingactivities?

Never OnceSeveraltimes

All thetime

o write a letter to a newspaper 91.7 5.7 2.3 0.3

o sign a petition. reerendum 77.6 15.1 6.9 0.4

o take part in protests. rallies 74.9 14.7 8.9 1.4

o call a hot line in order to report/complain about something

84.8 10.3 4.4 0.6


59/68

7. In the past 12 months. were there anymeetings to discuss the problems in yourmunicipality?

9. In the past 12 months. did the people in yourmunicipality voluntary organize themselves to dosomething useul (street cleaning. etc.)?

Yes 26.6 Yes 22.8

No 39.5 No 49.1

Dont know 33.9 Dont know 28.1

8. Whether and how many times did youparticipate at such meetings?

10. Whether and how many times did you participatein such activity in the past 12 months?

I didnt participate (dont know) 65.1 I did not participate (dont know) 38.1

Once 7.1 Once 6.0

Several times 9.0 Several times 5.2

Many times 2.2 Many times 1.6

Tere were no meetings 16.7 Tere were no such activities 49.1

11. Do you personally help the people

in your community without receivingcompensation or that (helping oldpeople. poor. etc.)?

13. In the past 12 months. have you been involved inthe work o a civil society organization?

Yes 40.8 Yes 17.0

No 59.2 No 83.0

12. In the past month. how much time did you spend (through organizations or on your own)helping other people?

I didnt spend any time 59.2

Up to 4 hours. hal a day 25.5

From 4 t 8 hours. one day 9.0

Over 8 hours (one working day) 6.3

14. I you were involved in a civil society organization. which sector does it cover?

Churches and aith communities 4.7

Democracy. human rights and rule o law 0.9

Children. young people. students 0.7

Ethnic communities 0

Women and gender issues 0

Environment and nature 0.9

Health 1.1

Inormation 0

Culture and art 0

People with special needs 0.6

Proessional associations 0

Non-violence and tolerance 0

Education and science 0

Financial services 0

Civil Society Development 0.8


60/68

0

Patriotic 0

Rural development 0.8

Employers organization 0

rade unions 1.2

Social and humanitarian 0.8

Sport. hobby and recreation 1.4

Old people 0.9

Other 2.1

Was not involved 83.0

15. In what way were you involved in theirwork?

16. In comparison with two years ago. is yourparticipation now higher or lower?

I paid membership ee 2.2 Higher 5.8

Voluntary work (no

compensation)5.2 Almost the same 10.8

aking part in activities 7.2 Lower 2.6

Money donation 2.4 Im not involved 80.9

I was not involved 83.0

17. Which two o the organizations you are involved in are the most important to you?

Local non-governmental organization 2.1

International non-governmental organization 0.2

Women and gender issues 1.0

rade unions 1.3

Faith communities 3.6

Social and humanitarian organizations 1.2

Sport organizations 1.2

Environment and nature 0.3

Children. young people. students 0.9

Old people (retired) 0.3

Business and other proessional/ arming associations 0.7

Health 0.8

Other 1.2

I am not involved in any organization 85.0

18. Why these organizations are important to you?

Because I provide additional income and other personal gains rom the organization 1.1

Because o the opportunity or socialization (to meet new people. to hang out withthem. etc.)

2.7

For personal development (gaining new knowledge and experiences) 2.9

Because they help my community 3.3

Because their mission is complementary to my belies 4.4

For the opportunity to have good reputation and respect (sel-realization) 0.6

I am not involved in any organization 85.0


61/68

19. Have you ever contributed (money/goods) or charity in the past 12 months?

Yes. regularly almost each month and in every action 9.8

Yes. several times 54.8

No. but I would give 26.3

No. and I wouldnt give 9.1

20. Why do you give (charity contributions)?

People should support each other 36.3

Sympathy 18.2

I have enough and I can give 4.7

o get rid o those that insisted on getting something 0.9

I was uncomortable to reuse 3.7

Other 0.7

I dont give 35.4

21. I you dont give. why is this so?

Everyone should take care o onesel 2.9

I dont have enough or mysel (I need assistance) 10.0

I dont believe to anyone. Im suspicious about abuses 4.0

Im not sure whether they really need it 2.1

Im not inormed how this money is used 2.9

I dont believe this is eective 2.2

I want to give. but I dont know how 4.2Other 1.5

I give 64.6

No answer 5.7

22. I you gave charity in the past 12 months. what was the purpose?

Humanitarian assistance. helping poor people 34.8

reatment o sick people 16.3

Construction o religious acilities and support to aith communities 7.0

Te eeling to help one another. solidarity 6.8

Helping schools 0.3

Improving the lie in the local community. inrastructure 0.4

Supporting the sport activities 0.2

Other 0.9

I didnt give 29.3

No answer 4.0


62/68

23. I you give charity. what are your priorities? 1 2 3

Churches and aith communities 17.5 7.7 4.4

Democracy. human rights and rule o law 2.6 3.0 1.7

Children. young people. students 11.2 11.8 8.8

Ethnic communities 0.5 1.4 0.8

Women and gender issues 0.9 1.8 1.8

Environment and nature 1.4 2.8 3.6

Health 16.7 15.6 9.1

Culture and art 0.4 2.1 2.4

People with special needs 12.7 12.5 11.1

Non-violence and tolerance 1.2 1.7 3.6

Education and science 1.2 3.0 5.5

Old people 3.4 8.7 9.7

Civil Society Development 0.7 0.9 2.2

Patriotic 0.3 0.5 1.4

Rural development 2.7 2.4 2.9

Social care (humanitarian) 15.6 11.8 13.3

Sport. hobby and recreation 1.7 1.7 4.5

I dont give 9.3 9.3 9.3

No other priority 1.4 3.8

24. I you give charity. to which two levels you give priority? 1 2Locally in the neighbourhood unit 57.6 10.0

In your municipality or your town 27.3 44.7

In your region (in Macedonia) 5.2 24.1

Nationally (all over Macedonia) 6.3 12.0

Internationally (outside Macedonia) 0.7 3.1

No answer/ no other priority 2.9 6.1

25. I you gave charity. what was it?

Money 43.8

Goods (ood. clothes) 15.9

Charity work (care. care or elderly. transer o knowledge. etc.) 3.9

I didnt give 36.4

26. How much did you give in charitycontributions (money or goods) in thepast 12 months?

27. I you gave money. what was the amount?

Up to 500 MKD 26.3 Petty cash. less than 10 MKD 2.2

501 - 1.000 MKD 11.2 10 - 50 MKD 7.5

1.001 - 2.000 MKD 6.8 50 - 100 MKD 12.6


63/68

2.001 - 5.000 MKD 3.4 100 - 500 MKD 8.2

5.001 - 10.000 MKD 2.1 Over 500 MKD 13.3

Over 10.000 MKD 1.3 I didnt give money 19.8

Dont know 12.4 I didnt give anything 36.4

I didnt give 36.4

28. State your preerred way o giving. Priority rom 1 t 2 1 2

From door to door (on hand) 49.0 7.5

In a charity box 11.9 18.8

On bank account (bank order) 14.5 18.8

ele-donation (SMS. phone call) 12.4 20.8

Credit card 0.3 2.8

By buying objects (auction. store) 2.4 7.6

By buying branded products 1.0 4.4

By buying services (concerts. etc) 2.5 6

Buying lottery ticket /bingo 0.7 1.7

I dont give 5.4 5.4

No second priority 6.2

29. State to whom or through which organization you preer to give.Priority rom 1 t 2. 1 2

Directly to the beneciary (I dont like intermediaries) 58.7 12.3

Church and aith community 13.0 24.6

Macedonian Red Cross (and Red Crescent) 7.7 17.7

International organization 2.6 4.3

Civil society organization 3.1 7.3

Macedonian Centre or International Cooperation (MCIC) 0.4 1.6

Neighbourhood unit or municipality 2.9 9.3

Public institution (hospital. school) 6.3 11.9

I dont give 5.4 5.4

No second priority n.r. 5.6

30. I you preer to give directly to the beneciary. why is this so?I want to see whom I give 34.1

I want him/her to see who is giving 6.3

I want to see the gratitude personally 3.3

o avoid abuse 35.0

I wouldnt give directly 12.5

I wouldnt give at all 4.8

No answer 3.9


64/68

31. How do you get inormation on charity activities?

Directly rom beneciaries/ those who request 28.3

Electronic media 30.1

Printed media 8.0

Church and aith community 5.7

Letters and yer 0.8

Friends and neighbors 15.7

Im not inormed 9.8

No answer 1.7

32. What should the charity givers get? Priority rom 1t 3. 1 2 3

Public gratitude by announcing my name 64,5 8,6 4.9

Public gratitude by announcing my name 5,3 10,1 2.8

ax stimulation / exemption 2,8 10,1 6.8

Feedback how the money / assistance is used 12,1 27,7 13.0

Letter o gratitude 2,1 5,2 9.2

o visit the activity 3,0 9,9 24.6

Other 1,7 2,6 7.5

I dont give 5,9 6,1 6.2

No answer 2,7 2,7 2.7

No other priority 17,0 22.3

33. Charity contributions collected rom the citizens are used strictly or the purpose:

Yes. always 13.1

Mainly. they are used or the purpose 40.1

Partially. they are abused (partially are not used) 37.2

Tey are always abused (they are never used) 8.3

No answer (dont know) 1.4


65/68

APPENDIX 2. SAMPLE SRUCURE

SAMPLE SRUCURE %

GENDER

Male 50.6

Female 49.4

AGE

18-25 years 14.9

26-30 years 17.231-40 years 23.6

41-50 years 21.5

50-65 years 17.5

Over 65 years 5.2

EHNICAL BELONGING

Macedonian 65.0

Albanian 23.6

urk 4.3

Roma 1.6

Serb 2.2

Vlach 0.9

Other 2.4

EDUCAION

Uncompleted primary 2.2

Primary 17.2

Secondary 58.4

Higher/ High 22.3

PLACE OF RESIDENCE

Village 40.3

own with 15.000 residents 8.2

own with 15.000 t 50.000 residents 14.2

own with over 50.000 residents 15.9

Skopje 21.5


66/68

EMPLOYMEN SAUS

Employed in the public sector 19.6

Employed in the private sector 31.8

Employed in the civil sector (NG) 0.6

Farmer 2.6

Housewie 7.7

Retired 9.3

Student 9.8

Unemployed 18.5

MEMBER OF CIVIL SOCIEY ORGANIZAION

Yes 15.6

No 84.4

MONHLY INCOME PER HOUSEHOLD MEMBERUp to 2.000 MKD 18.1

2.001 - 4.000 den. 28.9

4.001 - 6.000 den. 22.8

6.001 - 9.000 den. 15.5

9.001 - 12.000 den. 7.9

Over 12.000 MKD 6.7

No answer

O WHICH POLIICAL PARY ARE YOU INCLINED?SDSM 13.2

VMRO-DPMNE 19.3

DUI 7.0

DPA 6.3

PDP 1.6

NSDP (ito Petkovski) 2.1

LDP 1.6

Other 4.2

None 44.8

REGIONS

Southeast 9.0

Eastern 10.3

Northeast 8.5

Vardar 6.0

Southwest 8.8

Skopje 29.4

Pelagonija 11.0

Polog 17.1


67/68


68/68

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

342.57 (497.7) 2007 (047)

061.2 (497.7) 2007 (047)

KLEKOVSKI, Sa{oOp{testvena odgovornost na gra|anite / (avtori Sa{o Klekovski,

Aleksandar Kr`alovski, Gonce Jakovleska). Skopje : Makedonskicentar za me|unarodna sorabotka, 2008. 69 str. : tabeli ; 20 sm.

social responsibility of citizens

Documents