Dokumentumok
Nyomtatóbarát változat
Cím:
Romanian Evaluation
Szerző:
Ország:
A kiadás helye:
A kiadás éve:
Kiadó:
Terjedelem:
Nyelv:
angol
Tárgyszavak:
network, Social Capital, Central and Eastern Europe, community development, Romania
Állomány:
Community Development Network Building in Central and Eastern Europe, Közösségfejlesztési hálózatépítés Kelet-Közép Európában
Forditas:
Megjegyzés:
Annotáció:
Leltár:
Raktári jelzet:
E

SOCIAL CAPITAL in Rural community

Based on a questionnaireo of the Home Office Citizenship Survey, U. K.
Survey conducted in one Romanian rural community by the Romanian Association for Community Development
- March 2004-


Summary

The survey was applied in one small rural community from South East region of Romania, situated near (15 km) far from the capital city of Buzau County. It is a small rural community where RACD is working since 2000, through series of projects aiming to improve the School’s relationship with the community.

The survey was implemented by one of the community facilitator that currently work with Aliceni people in the ongoing project „School closer to the Community” helped by a group of pupils in the last grade of gymnazium.

The methodology of survey was randomly based. The sampling was made randomly, of people over 17 years old, based on household as unit. Each two households, a person was interviewed- in the first household a women should be interviewed, in the second household a men.
It was established at a number of 95 respondents out of a population of 404 and a total number of household of 190.


A number of 87 people responded. The main respondents – 62% -were elderly people, between 45 and over 64 years old , most of them retired.

Out of the total number of respondents 58,6 % were women.


Main findings of the survey
A. 1. Interpersonal relationship and trust

The majority of village inhabitants know each other. 85,1% know the majority of of people living on the same neighborhood (street) There was no answer showing that people do not know people in their neigbourhood.


As regarding the interpersonal trust, more than half of the respondents from Aliceni community said that they trust the majority of people living on the same neighborhood (street). Another 18.4% trust some of the people living on the same neigbourhood. 8 % of the respondents do not trust anybody in their neigbourhood.



This is in line with the item aiming to measure the degree in which people consider the community a place where people take care of each other. 79% of the respondents answered yes definitely or yes in some extent.

Due to the fact that Aliceni is a small community, people go often round to each other’s house. 36.8% have people round to their house every day and they are going round every day to friends or neighbours –32.2%. Only 1.1 % of the sample nevere receive visits. As the majority of the respondents are elderly people, they tens more to receive visits that to go visit other people. The percentage of people that never pay visits to other neighbours is 4.6%.

People visit each other weekly and more often during the week.

A. 2. Trust in institutions and relationship between individuals and institutions

From the responses, the majority of the initiatives for contacting state institutions were mainly at very local level, such as Local Council, public servants at local level, atended public meetings. None of the respondents have contacted the central autoihorities institutions. None of them participated in a public demonstration.


The most trusted institution is the the police (49.4%) followed by Local Council (47.1%), and the court (35.6%). The less trusted institutions are the Parliament (57.5%) and politicians (55.1%).

We have to note that, as the majority of the respondents are retired people, the answer regarding the degree of trust in emplyer have not a big relevance.
The perceived influence of individuals in the decizionmaking process of community life is low. Only 2.3 % are definitely sure that they can influence decisions affecting local area, and another 10.3 % tend to agree that they could have influence. A percentage of 41.7 % could not appreciate or did not answer.

B. Volunteer involvement

The types of activities in which people involves at local level are: religion activities-11.5 %, elderly –9.2 %. The next tuype of activities preferred, in a percentage of 5.7 each are children’s education and local community or neighbourhood groups. The respondents are willing to become involved in volunteer activities in a percentage of 41%, as they are generally old people.

The reasons that could make them more involved in such activities are mainly the availability of information about the things they could do (40.2%), a positive example of friends and/or family (35.6 %) and the possibility of doing this from home (34.5 %)


33.3% mentioned that they would involve in a voluntary activity if somebody will ask directly for help.


In the last 12 months they were helping non - relatives especially in cases when they have to give advice to someone- 55.2%, to do shopping, collecting pension or paying bills for someone – 32.2 %.

The next type of offered help was to keep in touch with someone who has difficulty getting out and about – 26.4 % as well as looking after a property or a pet for someone who is away and transporting or escorting someone – each with 24.1 %.

Other results

As the survey was carried out with the help of children from the community (last grade in the gymnasium), a number of 10 such pupils were trained in how to operate the interview. They worked first days in pairs, and then they made the interviews alone.

During the interviews they discovered that there are households were only people over 61 lives alone. This raised their awareness about what future help they can offer to those people.

Tables with data

Item
Frequency
Percent
The majority of people living on the same neighborhood (street)
74
85.1
Same people living on the same neighborhood (street)
9
10.3
Few people living on the same neighborhood (street)
3
3.4
You do not know people living on the same neighborhood (street)
0
0
No response
1
1.1
Total
87
100.0

1. You could say you know:

Item
Frequency
Percent
The majority of people living on the same neighborhood (street)
74
85.1
Same people living on the same neighborhood (street)
9
10.3
Few people living on the same neighborhood (street)
3
3.4
You do not know people living on the same neighborhood (street)
0
0
No response
1
1.1
Total
87
100.0

2. You could say you trust:

Item
Frequency
Percent
The majority of people living on the same neighborhood (street)
45
51.7
Same people living on the same neighborhood (street)
16
18.4
Few people living on the same neighborhood (street)
12
13.8
None of the people living on the same neighborhood (street)
7
8.0
No response
7
8.0
Total
87
100.0

3. Would you say this neighborhood is a place where neighbors look out for each other?

Item
Frequency
Percent
Yes, definitely
40
46.0
Yes, to some extent
29
33.3
No
10
11.5
DK/NA
8
9.2
Total
87
100.0

4. How often do you have friends or neighbors round to your house?

Item
Frequency
Percent
Every day
32
36.8
Several times a week
29
33.3
At least once a week
12
13.8
At least once a fortnight
2
2.3
At least once a month
5
5.7
Less than once a month
2
2.3
Never
1
1.1
DK/NA
4
4.6
Total
87
100.0

5. And how often do you go round to other people’s houses? That is friends or neighbors.

Item
Frequency
Percent
Every day
28
32.2
Several times a week
25
28.7
At least once a week
14
16.1
At least once a fortnight
5
5.7
At least once a month
6
6.9
Less than once a month
3
3.4
Never
4
4.6
DK/NA
2
2.3
Total
87
100.0

6. In the last 12 months have you done any of the things?

Item
Yes
No
DK/NA
Total
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
Contacted a local councillor
22
25.3
61
70.1
4
4.6
87
100.0
Contacted a Member of Parliament (MP)
85
97.7
2
2.3
87
100.0
Contacted a public official working for your local council
28
32.2
55
63.2
4
4.6
87
100.0
Contacted a public official working for part of Central Government
85
97.7
2
2.3
87
100.0
Attended a public meeting or rally
4
4.6
80
92.0
3
3.4
87
100.0
Taken part in a public demonstration or protest
85
97.7
2
2.3
87
100.0
Signed a petition
7
8.0
78
89.7
2
2.3
87
100.0
Non of these
51
58.6
36
41.4
87
100.0

7. Do you agree or disagree that you can influence decisions affecting your local area?

Item
Frequency
Percent
Definitely agree
2
2.3
Tend to agree
9
10.3
Tend to disagree
24
27.6
Definitely disagree
16
18.4
DK/NA
36
41.7
Total
87
100.0

8. How much do you trust?

Item
A lot
A fair amount
Not very much
Not al all
DK/NA
Total
%
%
%
%
%
%
The police
21.8
27.6
18.4
19.5
12.6
100.0
The court
18.4
17.2
20.7
21.8
21.8
100.0
Your employer
9.2
4.6
2.3
6.9
77
100.0
Politicians
13.8
13.8
14.9
40.2
17.2
100.0
The Parliament
18.4
10.3
16.1
41.4
13.8
100.0
Local Council
27.6
19.5
23.0
16.1
13.8
100.0

9. Have you been involved with (all) these groups, clubs or organizations in the last 12 months?

Item
Yes
No
DK/NA
Total
%
%
%
%
Children’s education/schools
5.7
93.1
1.1
100.0
Youth/children’s activities (outside school)
2.3
96.6
1.1
100.0
Education for adults
98.9
1.1
100.0
Sports/exercise (taking part, coaching or going to watch)
98.9
1.1
100.0
Religion
11.5
87.4
1.1
100.0
Politics
98.9
1.1
100.0
Health, Disability and Social welfare
3.4
93.1
3.4
100.0
The elderly
9.2
89.7
1.1
100.0
Safety, First Aid
4.6
94.3
1.1
100.0
The environment, animals
1.1
96.6
2.3
100.0
Justice and Human Rights
2.3
96.6
1.1
100.0
Local community or neighbourhood groups
5.7
92.0
2.3
100.0
Citizen’s Groups
4.6
94.3
1.1
100.0
Hobbies/Recreation/Arts/Social clubs
1.1
97.7
1.1
100.0
Trade union activity
97.7
2.3
100.0
None of these
82.8
17.2
100.0

10. Do you ever feel that you would like to spend any (irregular volunteers/unknown frequency: more) time helping groups, clubs or organizations, or not?

Item
Frequency
Percent
Yes
36
41.4
No
39
44.8
DK/NA
12
13.7
Total
87
100.0

11. Which, if any of these, might make you likely to get involved in future?

Item
Yes
No
DK/NA
Total
%
%
%
%
If someone asked me directly to get involved
33.3
54.0
12.6
100.0
If my friends or family got involved with me
35.6
50.6
13.8
100.0
If someone who was already involved was there to help get me started
32.2
51.7
16.1
100.0
If more information about the things I could do was available
40.2
46.0
13.8
100.0
If I knew I could get my expenses paid
25.3
60.9
13.8
100.0
If someone could provide transport when I needed it
27.6
57.5
14.9
100.0
If I could do it from home
34.5
51.7
13.8
100.0
If I knew it would help me improve my skills or get qualifications
26.4
55.2
18.4
100.0
If I knew it would benefit me in my career or improve my job prospects
26.4
56.3
17.2
100.0
Other
18.4
42.5
39.1
100.0
None of these
41.4
58.6
100.0

12. In the last 12 months, have you done any of these things, unpaid, for someone who is not a relative? This might be for a friend, neighbor or someone else.

Item
Yes
No
DK/NA
Total
%
%
%
%
Keeping in touch with someone who has difficulty getting out and about (visiting in person, telephoning or e-mailing)
26.4
59.8
13.8
100.0
Doing shopping, collecting pension or paying bills for someone
32.2
52.9
14.9
100.0
Cooking, cleaning, laundry, gardening or other routine household jobs for someone
19.5
66.7
13.8
100.0
Decorating, or doing any kind of home or car repairs for someone
16.1
69.0
14.9
100.0
Baby sitting or caring for children
20.7
65.5
13.8
100.0
Sitting with or providing personal care (e.g. washing, dressing) for someone who is sick or frail
20.7
65.5
13.8
100.0
Looking after a property or a pet for someone who is away
24.1
62.1
13.8
100.0
Giving advice to someone
55.2
29.9
14.9
100.0
Writing letters or filling in forms for someone
16.1
70.1
13.8
100.0
Representing someone (for example in talking to a council official)
12.6
72.4
14.9
100.0
Transporting or escorting someone (for example to a hospital, on an outing or a school-run)
24.1
62.1
13.8
100.0
Anything else (specify)……………………………………
9.2
34.5
56.3
100.0
No help given in last 12 months
29.9
70.1
100.0

13. Have you yourself, in the last 12 months, benefited from unpaid help in any of these ways? Please exclude help from members of your family (that’s any relatives).

Item
Yes
No
DK/NA
Total
%
%
%
%
Keeping in touch with your (visiting in person, telephoning or e-mailing)
36.8
49.4
13.8
100.0
Doing shopping, collecting pension or paying bills for you
25.3
60.9
13.8
100.0
Cooking, cleaning, laundry, gardening or doing other routine household jobs for you
16.1
71.3
12.6
100.0
Decorating, or doing any kind of home or car repairs for you
14.9
70.1
14.9
100.0
Baby sitting or caring for your children
16.1
59.8
24.1
100.0
Sitting with or providing personal care (e.g. washing, dressing) for you
21.8
65.5
12.6
100.0
Looking after a property or a pet for you whilst you are away
31.0
52.9
16.1
100.0
Giving advice to you
42.5
44.8
12.6
100.0
Writing letters or filling in forms for you
9.2
74.7
16.1
100.0
Representing you (for example in talking to a council official)
5.7
77.0
17.2
100.0
Transporting or escorting you (for example to a hospital or on an outing)
21.8
65.5
12.6
100.0
Anything else (specify)
8.0
39.1
52.9
100.0
No help received in last 12 months
28.7
3.4
67.8
100.0
Breakdown of respondents on gender:

Item
Frequency
Percent
men
36
41.4
women
51
58.6
Total
87
100.0
Breakdown of respondents on age:

Item
Frequency
Percent
17-24 years old
8
9.2
24-34 years old
11
12.6
35-44 years old
14
16.1
45-54 years old
5
5.7
55-64 years old
15
17.2
Over 64 years old
34
39.1
Total
87
100.0

Dokumentumok