Download - Civic Engagement

Transcript

Civic Engagement

Tom Miller, Ph.D. President, National Research Center

Monday, October 8, 2007

“Civic engagement means working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes.”

Civic Responsibility and Higher Education, edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000.

Outcomes for Communities with Strong Civic Engagement

• Government is “more effective and more innovative”

• Less crime• Less poverty• More employment • Better and more sustainable policies

• More frequent resident cooperation Adapted from: ASPA Task Force on Civic Education in the 21st Century and Putnam, R.B. Bowling Alone, America’s Declining Social

Capital. Journal of Democracy, 1995.

Outcomes of Civic Engagement for Local Government

• Greater levels of trust in local government officials*

• Increased support for community-wide solutions recommended by elected council members*

• Re-election of council members*• Collective self-restraint in the face of community

need**

*Rahn and Rudolph 2005

** Tyler and Deguey, 1995

Civic Engagement on the Wane in American Cities

• Decreased levels of voting• Reduced levels of volunteerism• Less time spent on activities with neighbors

The American Democracy Project: Civic Engagement, Higher Education and the 21st Century. A cooperative project of the AASCU and New York Times

“By almost every measure, Americans, direct disengagement in politics and government has fallen steadily and sharply over the last generation.” Putnam, R.B. Bowling Alone, America’s Declining Social

Capital. Journal of Democracy, 1995, page 2.

What can the National Citizen Survey Tell Us about the current status of Civic Engagement in America?

Brief Background on NCS

• ICMA/NRC initiative– Low-cost turnkey omnibus citizen survey

service – Normative comparisons

• Primary purposes of the survey – To track resident perspectives about quality of

community characteristics and amenities– To evaluate local government and resident

participation in local activities – To create a performance score card

What kinds of questions does The NCSTM ask?

• Quality of life in the community

• Quality of local government services

• Resident participation in local activities, including civic engagement

• Policy options

• Community demographics

How is The NCS™ Conducted?

• Mail, phone, Web*

• 1,200 randomly selected households (HH)

• Person within HH selected without bias

• Average response rate = 39%– across more than 130 administrations

• Sample reweighted

Civic Engagement Analysis

• Based on over 100,000 completed surveys from 190 jurisdictions

• Objectives: – Assess current level of civic engagement in

American cities– Examine relationships among civic

engagement and government/community outcomes

OutcomesPublic TrustRecycling

Quality of Local Government ServicesSense of Community

Community as a Place to Live

Measures of Civic Engagement

Electoral Participation Volunteerism Public Meeting

Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Respondent and Community Characteristics

Electoral Participation

Indicators of Electoral Participation Percent of Residents

Registered to vote 78%

Voted in last election 70%

Likely to vote in next election 81%

Said “yes” to all 3 above 61%

Civic Attentiveness

Indicators of Civic AttentivenessPercent of Residents

Read jurisdiction newsletter 89%

Watched a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting on cable television

47%

Attended a meeting of local elected officials or other local public meeting on cable television

28%

Volunteerism

Residents Volunteering in 12 Months Prior to Survey

At Least Once44%

Never56%

Participation in Community Life

Community Amenity Percent of Residents

Visited a public library or used the library services

73%

Used a recreation centers 56%

Participated in a recreation program or activity

54%

Visited a parks 85%

Residents with Higher Levels of Civic Engagement tended to be:

• Middle-aged or older– (lowest levels in 18-34 year olds)

• Non-Hispanic White

• Live in households with higher incomes

• Own their homes

• Live in detached housing units

• Live in regions other than the South

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Outcomes

Electoral Participation

Volunteerism

Public Meeting Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Public Trust

Recycling

Quality of Local Govt Services

Sense of Community

Community as a Place to Live

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Outcomes

Electoral Participation

Volunteerism

Public Meeting Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Recycling

Public Trust

Quality of Local Govt Services

Sense of Community

Community as a Place to Live

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Outcomes

Electoral Participation

Volunteerism

Public Meeting Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Quality of LocalGovernment Services

Public Trust

Sense of Community

Recycling

Community as a Place to Live

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Outcomes

Electoral Participation

Volunteerism

Public Meeting Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Sense of Community

Public Trust

Quality of Local Govt Services

Recycling

Community as a Place to Live

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Outcomes

Electoral Participation

Volunteerism

Public Meeting Attendance

Participation in Community Life

(Library and Parks & Rec)

Community as a Place to Live

Public Trust

Quality of Local Govt Services

Recycling

Sense of Community

Civic Engagement Levels by Population and Income

Population Size

Median Annual Household Income Public Trust Recycling

Quality of Local

Government Services

Sense of Community

Community as a Place to Live

25,000 $35,000 Relatively Low 56.2 15.4 53.8 47.8 61.0

25,000 $35,000 Relatively High 56.2 21.8 55.7 53.7 66.8

25,000 $55,000 Relatively Low 61.1 18.1 60.6 52.4 68.4

25,000 $55,000 Relatively High 61.1 24.5 62.5 58.3 74.2

120,000 $35,000 Relatively Low 55.6 17.7 53.3 46.9 61.0

120,000 $35,000 Relatively High 55.6 24.1 55.2 52.8 66.9

120,000 $55,000 Relatively Low 60.6 20.4 60.1 51.5 68.5

120,000 $55,000 Relatively High 60.6 26.8 62.0 57.4 74.3

Predicted OutcomesCharacteristics

Civic Engagement Levels

Civic Engagement and Older Residents

• Older residents were, in general, less civically engaged than younger counterparts:– They volunteered less– Participated in community life less often

(except for use of recreation centers)– Reported lower rates of attendance or watching public

meetings

– But they voted more often!

Huge untapped community resource!

New to the NCSTM

• Ratings of: – community opportunities to participate in local

government matters– likelihood of community residents cooperating with

requests of city officials for community problem solving

• Neighborliness• Participation in:

– civic groups– religious or spiritual activities – informal service to friends and neighbors

• Visits to jurisdiction web site

• “Democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of a conjoint communicated experience.” John Dewey

“The performance of our democratic institutions depends in measurable ways upon social capital.”

Robert Putnam

The American Democracy Project: Civic Engagement, Higher Education and the 21st Century. A cooperative project of the AASCU and New York Times

Relationship of Civic Engagement to Community and Government-level Outcomes • Volunteerism, participation in community life, community

problem solving and newsletter readership all had weak but significant positive relationships with all outcomes

• Electoral participation had positive correlations with all outcomes except public trust

• Meeting attendance had positive a relationship with community ratings but a negative relationship with governmental ratings

• Watching meetings had negative relationships with all but one outcome (sense of community)

Thank you!