Skip to Main Navigation

Russian about development assistance : Finding of public opinion research : in-depth interviews with opinion leaders (Inglês)

Public opinion research of the Russian population attitudes towards Official Development Assistance(ODA) was undertaken in 2010 as part of the DFID supported WB Russia as a Donor Initiative (RDI) program assisting Russian Government in its development aid efforts. The research was conducted by Levada-Center, an independent polling and sociological company, using qualitative (in-depth interviews with opinion leaders) and quantitative (nationally representative survey) methodology. Volumes 1 and 2 report respectively on the findings of the qualitative and quantitative surveys. The qualitative survey included 25 opinion leaders interviews (public officials, NGOs, academia, business community, and the media), conducted in the cities of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Krasnoyarsk, and Rostov. The interviews covered economic situation in Russia; Russia's global role; potential recipient countries of Russian ODA and types of assistance; and overall awareness of Russian ODA activities. The opinion leaders share a common feeling that Russia is a "rich country with poor people" that still should take increasingly active role in development aid, being an influential "world power". Opinion leaders believe that Russian ODA should focus on: (i) countries affected by natural disasters; (ii) neighboring former Soviet bloc countries that have traditionally been "a zone of Russia's historic responsibility"; and (iii) countries posing global security threats. "Giving a fishing rod, not fish" was indicated as a preferred approach to development aid. Joint ODA programs with the World Bank and other multilateral organizations were supported as a tool to strengthen Russia's donor role, learn international practices, and reduce corruption risks. Most of the interviewees had little knowledge of the Russian ODA, but they thought it was matching the national interests, and were interested to learn more on ODA. A need to inform the general public about Russia's donor role was highlighted. The nationwide survey included 1503 respondents from 96 cities and 35 rural settlements located in 44 regions of Russia. The sample was nationally representative of the Russian adult population (aged 18 years and older). The survey showed that 3/4 of the population approve Russia's development aid to the poorest countries with preferred areas of Russia support being countries affected by natural disasters (64 percent support) and poor CIS countries (22 percent). Potential assistance could be provided in a form of sending Russian specialists to work in developing countries (58 percent); educating their students in Russia (51 percent); and supplying food and equipment at subsidized prices (30 percent). Medical care, access to basic education, and developing industrial facilities and infrastructure are seen as the areas of most effective assistance. Russia ODA collaboration with multilateral organizations is also seen favourably. Motivation of Russia ODA in the views of the respondents included: (i) shared moral responsibility for reduction of extreme poverty in developing countries; (ii) expansion of the circle of countries friendly to Russia; (iii) reduction the threat of terrorism and drug traffic between Russia and neighboring countries; and (iv) increase of Russia's influence and prestige in the world.


  • Autor

    Center, Leveda

  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Documento de Trabalho

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País

    Federação Russa,

  • Região

    Europa e Ásia Central,

  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Finding of public opinion research : in-depth interviews with opinion leaders

  • Palavras-chave

    health care system development;international development assistance;characteristic of poverty;lack of democracy;nature of poverty;freedom of speech;Rule of Law;lack of control;area of education;engine of growth;efficiency and quality;international aid community;freedom of assembly;human rights activist;disbursement of fund;civil society institution;Education and Development;public opinion research;lack of competition;foreign aid program;foreign economic aid;opinion leaders;financial aid;mass media;emergency aid;Provide Aid;international donor;totalitarian regime;poverty problem;budget line;aid recipient;stabilization fund;raw material;business community;external affairs;focus group;political development;democratic society;border area;aid policy;international programs;foreign policy;aid agency;recipient countries;local source;disaster situation;public support;Economic Policy;russian language;persistent poverty;high-tech industry;budget support;strategy development;insufficient information;governance system;global threat;international control;general development;financial information;fighting terrorism;common language;institutional problem;exchange rate;ancient culture;state official;large structures;government body;institutional environment;pension reform;authoritative sources;funds disbursement;foreign national;public control;democratic institution;foreign country;world community;corrupt regime;leadership qualities;social stability;aid strategy;authoritarian regimes;potential threat;cultural nature;aid disbursement;common international;financial crisis;ordinary people;market system;educational development;international community;civic problems;financial system;open society;pluralistic society;international conflict;global security;world leaders;criminal liability;primary product;international recognition;domestic sources;outreach effort;urban population;legal protection;interview guide;government intervention;great power;Donor countries;express opinion;ordinary citizens;personal data;budget policy;market economy;state authority;express intention;survey questions;foreign assistance;educational system;news headlines;political elite;Management Systems;electronic sources;general political;education expert;future engineer;primary source;bureaucratic structure;cultural influence;population group;relative poverty;absolute poverty;sanitary environment;civil right;civil rights;regional competition;radio station;commonly known;financial problem;bilateral relationship;political objective;service capacity;mobile hospital;international affair;assessment methodology;local factors;budget deficit;internal conflict;middle class;social stratification;foreign donor;donor aid;political issue;qualified personnel;qualified specialist;political influence;Exchange Rates;political stability;political aspect;



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.