The Desk Research Presentation

Mariam Darchiashvili

Chavchavadze State University, Georgia

Content

Introducing the university

Discussing problems in election surveys

Assuming Georgian voters’ profile along with statistical data

Some facts and figures about the university:

200 professors, 110 researchers, 8000 students 10 faculties, 2 colleges Best annual research rate among Georgian universities and institutions More than 30 active research projects Highest annual salary rates among high education of Georgia 14% of the annual consolidated budget allocated for research International peer reviewed publications Internationally recognized textbooks translated into Georgian Partnership with the following universities and research centers: University

of Idaho; Zoological Museum of Bonn; Free University of Brussels; University of Limerick, Ireland; Suleiman Demirel University, Turkey; Vilnius College of Higher Education, Lithuania; Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain; University of Groningen, Netherlands; University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA; Center for Science and Technologies in Ukraine; University of Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania; University of California - Berkley (Research project in Biophysics); Johns Hopkins University; University of Vienna; Max Planck Institute –Berlin; University of Pennsylvania etc.

2 Marine Research Centers

Brief Introduction of Chavchavadze State University

Ilia Chavchavadze State University (Iliauni) was established in 2006 on the basis of two higher educational institutions - Ilia Chavchavadze State University for Language and Culture and Sulkhan Saba Orbeliani State Pedagogical University. Although founded as recently as in 2006, Iliauni has been implementing a number of large-scale projects and programs in the fields of social sciences, humanities and natural sciences.

List of the researches and studies carried out at Chavchvadze State University:

• Caucasus Biodiversity research using Molecular-Genomic Methods;• Astronomic and Astrophysical studies (including Archeo-astronomy, only in the Black Sea and Caucasus region);• Seismic Researches of Georgia and Caucasus region;• Researches in Black Sea Biology and Archeology;• Metal and Bacteria interrelations (with Berkley University Biophysics Lab);• Regional studies:Caucasus and the Black Sea;Security Studies;• Identity Studies:Black Sea Identity Study with annual international conference;Soviet Studies;Study of political theology in Georgia - history and nowadays;Study of sexual behavior in Georgia.

Problems in Political/Election surveys

Difficulties regarding political/election surveys are generally related to the fact that there are two international organizations in Georgia IRI (International Republican Institute) and NDI (National Democratic Institute) who mainly conduct such surveys in the way that they request local research centers for fieldworks. The problem is that such donor organizations hold ownership on surveys and leave a lot of significant information private.

Political parties also conduct election surveys, but in this case also occurs the accessibility issue. They release results with no farther clarification and elaboration. Thus, one can hardly deal with methodology and sampling of such surveys.

Problems during political/election surveys In contrast with other type of surveys it is common that respondents reject participating in political/election surveys. They appear to be more open and sincere in social, marketing type of surveys rather than political ones. Respondents especially avoid rating politicians or showing their political sympathy. It can be assumed that today people in Georgia are preoccupied with politics at least partially caused by media or continuous street actions.

For receiving the desired information out of the survey there is a need of well trained interviewers as well as well composed questionnaires. Sociologist work hard that questions started with general issues for preparing respondents for more concretization.

How rejection on interviews affects the quality of the survey

Generally rejection on interviews does not affect the survey very much, since interviewers move towards other respondents with pre-determined Step Size. It is a regulated issue.

Despite the fact that respondents are not fond of speaking about politics there are many ways of persuading them.

Most importantly interviewers must be trained and prepared for all types of respondents. They must have skills of gaining trust with relevant tone and spirit.

Determining respondents as participants of elections

There is a group of questions in the questionnaire analyzing of which leads us to logical conclusions whether certain respondent will participate in elections or not.

It is common that respondent avoids direct question as whether he/she will vote, but other questions defining his/her political attitudes/behaviors help us find out about his/her electoral decisions. With direct questions it is often impossible to gain a precise information.

Georgian voters’ profile

Survey respondents are more or less interested in politics, moreover they are politically active so that they will participate in elections even if it were held the next day.

Respondents are undecided either about candidates/parties or general issues related to politics.

Respondents are neutral in most cases as they do not appear to be strictly positive or negative on issues presented bellow. Respondents seem more to be grouping problems rather than distinguishing some more than others.

Compared to previous elections respondents reveal positive expectations towards the next one.

One reason for this improved confidence in the May 21 election may be the various electoral reforms that have been implemented since the January 3 election.

Despite respondents’ dislike to many issues, they seem to be voting for stability than radical changes. It can be assumed as though they complain a lot, they vote for the existing governmental power.

Briefly about active vs. passive voter

Passive voter – often rejecting questions, avoding naming candidates, undecided about general political situation, avoding rating politicians.

Active voter – has a selected candidate of whom she/he speaks openly, decided about political positions, quick and clear in rating politicians.

Survey data

By BCG Research, Tbilisi, 4960 interviews April, 2008

BCG - Business Consulting Group Research is full service Marketing Research Agency operating both in the public and private sector, covering entire Georgia as well as conducting researches in Armenia and Azerbaijan.

64.00%

18.20%

5.20% 4.50% 7.70%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

I will definitely participate I may participate

I may not participate I will definitely not participate

DK / undecided

The survey shows that 64 % of respondents will definitely participate in elections if it were held in the following week, 18,20 % may participate, 5,20% may participate, 4,50 % will definitely not participate, while 7,70 % are undecided whether they will participate in elections.

Survey Data

Carried out by CRRC for NDI, Public attitudes towards elections in Georgia 2008 Research has been conducted in three waves: April – 2228 interviews July – 2152 interviews November – 2480 interviews Margin of error: +/- 3%

NDI is a non-profit, non-partisan, nongovernmental organization that has supported democratic institutions and practices in every region of the world for more than two decades.

51

4 4 3 2 3 1 1 1

1116

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Definite

ly ye

s 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Definite

ly no DK RA

%

51 % of survey respondents will definitely participate in elections in contrast with 11 % who will definitely not participate in elections if it were held tomorrow. 16 % of respondents are undecided while 3 % reject the question stated. Range of numbers bellow represent 9 – definitely participating in elections, 2 - definitely not participating.

Bellow is the data how survey respondents would vote if parliamentary elections were held tomorrow. The rating is leaded by UND 27 % (first choice) and CDM 25 % (second choice). It is also worth mentioning 38 % reject answering the question, which means that they are either undecided or avoid naming the chosen party.

27

8

3 3 3 31 1

11

38

5

25

97

47

4 5

19

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40First %

Second %

54 % of respondents consider problems with voters’ lists as the biggest barrier to free and fair elections. One person voting for other people and public officials campaigning on behalf of one party is equally problematic for 20 % of the respondents. Budget money being unfairly used in elections, voters’ feeling of losing jobs unless they vote in certain way, harassment of party activists, unequal access of election candidates to media and bribing the voters is also grouped together as a barrier for free/fair elections, having 14 %.

%

54

20

20151414

14

14

1211 7 5

Problems with voters’ lists

One person voting for other people

Public officials campaign on behalf ofone partyBudget money is used unfairly in theelectionVoters feeling they have to vote aspecific way to keep their jobsHarassment of party activists

Unequal access to media for somecandidates or partiesBribing of voters

Ballot stuffing

People voting more than once

Employers forcing employees to takepart in a campaignHarassment of voters

in the July data 25 % of respondents say not to be receiving enough information about the parties they are supporting, when 65 % of survey respondents are against of such an opinion.

November survey data shows that 44 % of respondents say to be receiving enough information from the media since May elections about the parties they support in contrast with 36 % answering the same question negatively.

65%

25%

8%3%

44%

36%

13%7%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

July 2008 November 2008

Yes

No

DK

RA

25% 26%

14%

32%

2%

18%17%

11%

47%

8%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

July 2008 November 2008

Did not happen Sometimes happenWidespread DKRA

In July data 25 % of respondents think that candidates/parties have an equal access to media, when 14 % of survey respondents are negative about the issue

November survey shows 18 % of respondents think that unequal access to media for some candidates or parties did not happen in contrast with 11 % thinking it to be widespread.

On question about how the parliamentary elections will be/were conducted respondents answer the following way:

6%1%

2%

23%16%

19%

4%10%10%

10%9%

8%19%

20%21%

22%24%

14%

16%21%

26%Completely accurate

2

3

4

Completely falsified

DK

RA

November July April

Survey Data

By CRRC 2550 interviews November-December,2008Georgia

The Caucasus Research Resource Centres program (CRRC) is a network of resource, research and training centres established in the capital cities of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia with the goal of strengthening social science research and public policy analysis in the South Caucasus.

%

14,1

30,5

39,1

14,2 0,5 1,6 Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Interest in international politics

Interest in national politics

%

22

36,4

29,4

10,3 0,3 1,7 Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Interest in local politics %

19,1

36

31,4

11,4 0,5 1,7Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Interest in country’s foreign policy

%

18,3

38,7

30,3

9,6 1 2,2Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Interest in domestic policy

%

22,5

41,7

25,4

7,5 0,8 2,1Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Interest in local policy

%

21,2

38,7

28,5

8,6 0,9 2,2Very interested

Quite interested

Hardly interested

Not interested at all

DK

RA

Opinion Poll - Commissioned by four television stations and conducted by Ilia Chavchavadze State University, the Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development, the Georgian Institute of Public Affairs, and the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies, in cooperation with US, Estonia, and Ukrainian experts.

Exit Poll - Conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner on behalf of United National Movement’s campaign; the figures above reflect the results of polling work conducted from April 29 – May 2.

Party Ratings

63,1%55%

14,2%17%

9,5%11%

5,7%7%

3,6%3%

0,0% 10,0% 20,0% 30,0% 40,0% 50,0% 60,0% 70,0%

United NationalMovement

United Opposition

Christian DemocraticMovement

Labour Party

Republican Party

Opinion Poll

Exit Poll

Survey Data

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for the United National Movement fieldworks by ACT Research 1,200 interviews, May 8-12, 2008

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner is the world's premium research and strategic consulting firm, working with corporations, issue groups and political campaigns throughout the United States and around the world.

The survey shows that among all Georgian adults, in the vote on the party lists, the UNM has the support of 43 percent, compared to 14 percent for the Christian Democratic Movement, 11 percent for the United National Council, 5 percent for the Labor Party of Georgia, and 2 percent for the Republican Party; 21 percent are undecided. [Figure1]

Looking only at the 53 percent of voters who are most likely to vote on May 21, the UNM’s support grows to 51 percent, while the Christian Democratic Movement earns 11 percent, the United National Council receives 10 percent, the Labor Party earns 5 percent, and the Republicans attract 3 percent.  Among these likely voters, 19 percent are undecided.  [Figure 2]

By examining their responses to other questions in the survey, it is possible to project how this block of 19 percent likely but undecided voters would most likely cast their ballots.  Once we allocate the undecided likely voters in this manner, the National Movement emerges with 54 percent of the vote, with 19 percent for the United Opposition Council, 17 percent for the Christian Democratic Movement, 6 percent for the Labor Party, and 4 percent (which would be below the threshold for gaining parliamentary seats) for the Republican Party.  These figures represent our best estimate of the race going into the final 9 days of the campaign.  [Figure 3]

To assess the vote for candidates in the 75 single-member districts, the survey conducted a named ballot test; that is, in each district survey respondents were presented with a choice among the actual names of the candidates running in that district.  This named ballot test shows the United National Movement winning 48 percent of the votes across all districts among all adults, and 56 percent of the vote among likely voters.  [Figure 4]  If the United National Movement earns the kinds of majorities that this survey projects for both the party list vote and the single member district votes, the party would emerge with a strong majority of seats in the next Parliament, and potentially a two-thirds majority.

The May 12 survey also shows that a strong majority of the public expects the May 21 elections to be more free and fair than the January 3 presidential election.  Among all adults, 63 percent expect the May 21 voting to be more free and fair; the figure among likely voters is 68 percent.  [Figure 5]

We test four different reforms that have been put in place since then: making voter lists available for public scrutiny; lowering the threshold at which parties win seats in parliament based on the party list vote, down from 7 percent to 5 percent; changing the composition of the parliament to include 75 seats selected by national list, and 75 selected in single-member districts; and ending same-day voter registration.  Each of these leads a majority of the public to feel that it will make the May 21 voting more free and fair.  [Figure 6]

To conclude, it is very interesting to evaluate the situation in dynamics, having data of different time periods and making comparisons. Most importantly for a sound study it is essential having data of similar methodology, time frame and questionnaires.

Nevertheless having the data as presented here gives a good opportunity for making a farther qualitative study about relation of people’s perceptions to events that went through the same time that the surveys were conducted. It would be very interesting to define what matters when it comes to forming public opinion.