Page 1

GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012 research series


NCDO is the Dutch expertise and advisory centre for citizenship and international cooperation. NCDO carries out research, provides information and advice, stimulates public debate and is actively involved in the field of training and education. For this, NCDO cooperates with government, political and social organisations, the business community and the research sector. If you have any questions about or remarks on this research or if you want to be kept up-to-date about new research, please contact NCDO through onderzoek@ncdo.nl. Illustration cover: Kim Verschoor Original publication: Nederlanders & Mondiaal Burgerschap 2012 (september 2012). Translation by Pamela Moore.

ISBN: 978-90-74612-32-6

Amsterdam, April 2013

NCDO is the centre for global citizenship. P.O. Box 94020, 1090 AD Amsterdam tel +31 (0)20 568 87 55 onderzoek@ncdo.nl, www.ncdo.nl


GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012 Christine Carabain Marije van Gent Evelien Boonstoppel

RESEARCH SERIES


contents SUMMARY

2

4

1. INTRODUCTION

9

1.1. WHAT IS GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP? 1.2. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

10 11

1.2.1. EFFICIENT USE OF WATER AND ENERGY

12

1.2.2. MOBILITY

13

1.2.3. RECYCLING & HANDLING OF WASTE

13

1.2.4. CONSUMPTION

14

1.2.5. SEARCHING FOR INFORMATION AND EXPRESSING AN OPINION

1.3. THIS RESEARCH

15

15

2. BEHAVIOUR

16

2.1. EFFICIENT USE OF ENERGY AND WATER 2.2. MOBILITY 2.3. RECYCLING AND HANDLING OF WASTE 2.4. CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR 2.5. SEARCHING FOR INFORMATION ABOUT GLOBAL ISSUES 2.6. EXPRESSING AN OPINION ON GLOBAL ISSUES 2.7. POLITICAL PARTICIPATION 2.8. DONATING TO CHARITY

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

2.8.1. WHO DONATES TO WHICH CHARITABLE ORGANISATIONS?

23

2.8.2. HOW MUCH IS DONATED?

24

2.9. VOLUNTEERING

2.9.1. WHO IS ACTIVE AS A VOLUNTEER AND WHERE?

25

2.9.2. DO THE DUTCH REGULARLY WORK AS VOLUNTEERS?

26

2.10. GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP INDEX 2.11. CONCLUSION

25

27 29

3. PRINCIPLES

32

32 33 34 35

3.1. HUMAN EQUALITY 3.2. MUTUAL DEPENDENCY IN THE WORLD 3.3. SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOLVING GLOBAL ISSUES 3.4. CONCLUSION

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


4. KNOWLEDGE ABOUT GLOBAL ISSUES

37

5. GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP

39 39 42 43

5.1. THE ROLE OF THE PRINCIPLES 5.2. THE ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE 5.3. THE ROLE OF PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS 5.4. THE ROLE OF ALTRUISTIC VALUES, CONTACT WITH OTHER CULTURES AND TRUST 5.5. THE EFFECT OF ALL THE ASPECTS TOGETHER 5.6. CONCLUSION

6. ATTITUDE WITH REGARD TO DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION

3

44 47 48

50

6.1. THE IMPORTANCE OF DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION 50 6.2. THE DUTCH AND THE BUDGET FOR DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION 52 6.3. CONCLUSION 54

REFERENCES

56

METHODOLOGY

58

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


SUMMARY This report investigates the extent to which Dutch citizens aged 18 years or older behave as global citizens. The key element within the concept of global citizenship is the contribution made by individuals towards a liveable world. This encompasses not only support for international cooperation, but also the way in which people’s involvement in international issues is expressed in their behaviour. It is this that this research evaluates.

Do the Dutch Behave as Global Citizens?

NCDO distinguishes nine types of behaviour related to environmental or social sustainability: 1) efficient use of water and energy; 2) mobility; 3) recycling and handling of waste; 4) consumer behaviour; 5) searching for information and 6) expressing an opinion on global issues; 7) political participation; 8) donating to charity and 9) volunteering.

Efficient Use of Water and Energy

With reference to water and energy wastage - such as leaving the tap running while brushing their teeth and leaving chargers in power points - the Dutch use energy in a responsible way. The vast majority of the Dutch exhibit behaviour that results in less energy wastage. However, the Dutch behave less responsibly with energy when their convenience is involved, such as with the use of laundry dryers. Almost half of the Dutch use such a device often or (almost) always.

Mobility

What choices do the Dutch make in the field of mobility? Do they opt for the train? Do they use the car for short distances? Only a small percentage of Dutch people often or (almost) always opt for the train. On the other hand, only a small percentage of Dutch people often or (almost) always use the car within their neighbourhood, or go on holiday by plane.

4

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Recycling and Handling of Waste

The Dutch seem to be responsible in their handling of waste. Only a small percentage often throw away food that is still edible: this also applies to disposing batteries with other waste. Also a significant percentage of the Dutch population donate goods so that they can be reused.

Consumer Behaviour

Are the Dutch sustainable consumers? Apart from choosing green energy, Dutch sustainable consumer behaviour still seems to be limited. A small percentage of the Dutch often or (almost) always buy fair-trade products. Compensating for flights is also not yet common behaviour amongst the Dutch population. Moreover, only a small percentage buy second hand goods. In addition, the vast majority of the Dutch population often or (almost) always eat meat.

Searching for Information and Expressing an Opinion on Global Issues

The vast majority of the Dutch follow the news about problems abroad. It is remarkable that this is mainly done through the ‘old’ media, such as newspapers, television and radio. The percentage of Dutch people who follow the news over the internet is still much lower. About one out of eight Dutch people often or (almost) always say something if family or friends do something that is not good for the environment. Only a small percentage frequently talk about environmental problems and poverty. However, if those who sometimes talk about these subjects are included, the vast majority of the Dutch do this. Only a very small percentage participate in (online) petitions or support charities through social media.

Political Participation

Political participation is largely limited to voting in elections. One out of four Dutch citizens is a member of a trade union. On the other hand, only a very small percentage are active members of a political party. 5

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Donating

The Dutch donate relatively large amounts and relatively often. Three quarters of the Dutch give to charity. Popular charitable organisations are those in the fields of development aid, health, nature and environment. Dutch contributors gave an average of 224 euros to charity in 2011. There are considerable differences between the average amounts of donations per sector. Traditionally, the highest average amounts are given to ideological organisations such as churches and mosques.

Volunteering

Forty-two percent of the Dutch perform voluntary services. This volunteering is not evenly distributed across the different sectors. The category ‘other’ is the largest. This category illustrates the diversity of Dutch volunteering activities, which range from activities at school or volunteering for the Apartment Owners Association (VVE) to collecting money for the KWF and managing a brass band. Sports clubs, community centres and places of worship (e.g. the church, mosque and temple) are also popular places for volunteering. Those who are active as volunteer appear to be so on a very regular basis: seventy-three percent of Dutch volunteers are active as volunteer at least once a month. The places of worship in the Netherlands can rely most on volunteers, who make an active contribution at least once a month.

Human Equality, Mutual Dependency and (Shared) Responsibility

NCDO distinguishes three principles that are thought to support global citizenship: human equality, a sense of mutual dependency and taking shared responsibility for solving global issues. These principles are widely supported by the Dutch population. This applies, in particular, to a sense of mutual dependency and taking shared responsibility and to a lesser extent to the idea of human equality. Education plays an important role in the extent to which the Dutch support these principles. Highly educated Dutch people support the three principles more often than those with a lower education. Three other personal characteristics each play a separate role with regard to these three principles. For example, women see people as more equal than men do. The Dutch aged 35 years and older are more willing to take responsibility than those who 6

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


are younger than 35 years. Dutch people who earn more are more aware of mutual dependency in the world. Also the extent to which people attach importance to altruistic values plays an important role in the extent to which they support the three principles. This applies in particular to their willingness to take (co-)responsibility. In addition, the amount of trust that Dutch people have in institutions plays a relatively important role. People who have more trust also have more support for these principles. What is the role that political preference plays with regard to adherence to the three principles? A fairly clear pattern is discernable here: Dutch citizens who vote for GroenLinks (the Dutch Green Party) and D66 (the New Democrats) support these principles the most. Also those who vote for the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) score well with regard to the principles. Those who vote for the PVV (the Dutch Freedom Party) support all three principles the least.

Global Citizenship?

The expectation that people who adhere more to the three principles – human equality , mutual dependency in the world and shared responsibility for solving global issues - behave more often as global citizens seems to be confirmed by the data collected. In particular, the principle of shared responsibility for solving global issues best explains the differences in the extent of global citizenship behaviour. Also other background characteristics appear to partially explain the differences in global citizenship behaviour. People who have more knowledge about global issues behave more often as global citizens than people who have less knowledge about these issues. Also, gender (female), age and education all have a positive influence on global citizenship behaviour. The more frequent occurrence of this behaviour in the highly educated, and particularly in women, may be partially explained by the fact that they support the three principles more often than less well educated people and men. Altruistic values, contact with other cultures and the amount of social and institutional trust also display a positive correlation with the extent to which 7

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


people behave as global citizens. In particular, the importance attached to altruistic values has a strong positive effect on global citizenship behaviour. The more altruistic the values, the more frequent the behaviour. These altruistic values also reduce the previously observed effects of the three principles. It turns out that, in particular, the positive effect of the principle of equality on global citizenship may partially be explained by the fact that people who support this principle also attach a greater importance to altruistic values. In spite of a decrease in the correlation, the principles of mutual dependency and shared responsibility continue to play a role in explaining the extent to which people behave as global citizens, even after a control has been done jointly for these background characteristics.

What is the Attitude of the Dutch with Regard to Development Cooperation?

The importance that the Dutch attach to development cooperation continues to remain high in 2012. The large majority of the Dutch population find it (very) important to assist poor countries with their development. In spite of this support, in 2012 almost half of the Dutch are of the opinion that the government budget for development cooperation should be reduced. On the other hand, an equally large group believes that the budget should remain the same or be increased. This means that there is permanent support for the government budget, but that this support is under pressure. Unlike previous years, this study did not ask why people are of the opinion that the government budget should be reduced. However, the Barometer International Cooperation 2011 showed that the main reason for wanting the government budget to be reduced was that the Dutch are of the opinion that their own economy should be put in order first. In view of the continued recession it is entirely possible that this argument now also plays a major role in the motivation for wanting the budget to be reduced.

8

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


chapter 1

introduction In this document we present the research ‘Global Citizenship in the Netherlands 2012’: a new research that is a continuation of the long tradition of the Barometer International Cooperation. For decades, working on support for development cooperation has been an important pillar of Dutch development policy. For this reason, up to 2011 NCDO annually issued the Barometer International Cooperation in which the Dutch public’s support for development cooperation was measured. Since 2011 NCDO has undergone a transformation and is no longer an organisation that focuses on the support for development cooperation, but has become the knowledge and advice centre in the field of global citizenship in the Netherlands. The shift from support for development cooperation to global citizenship is consistent with two important shifts in the thinking about international cooperation in general, i.e. the shift from the focus on poverty reduction in developing countries to global connectedness and the shift from support to participation. These shifts have led to the focus no longer being on ‘problems and challenges there’ but on ´problems and challenges here and there´. In addition, the focus has shifted from Dutch public support for government policy in the field of development cooperation to the question how individuals can contribute through their behaviour to solving global issues (Carabain et al, 2012). The focus on ‘here and there’ is also reflected in a government response (Dutch House of Representatives, 2011) on the report ´Minder pretentie, Meer ambitie´ (‘Less pretension, More ambition´) by the Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR, 2010) in which the inevitability of international cooperation having to tackle global issues in the field of security, stability or climate change is confirmed. Public goods are goods that, in principle, are freely available and for which people do not need to compete. As long ago as 1890, the Italian economist Ugo Mazzola (1890) identified the main characteristic of a public good, i.e. that 9

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


the consumption of a public good by one person does not reduce the ability of another to consume it. Examples of international public goods are clean air, financial stability and good health. The focus on participation also links up with a number of trends in Dutch society with regard to development cooperation. In spite of the fact that there is decreasing support for the policy of development cooperation amongst the Dutch population(Hento, 2011), there has been, for example, an increase in the number of Dutch people who buy fair-trade food (De Goede & Ruben, 2012). The Dutch also seem to be increasingly taking responsibility for global problems through individual participation. Relatively new development organisations, such as the 1% Club, are connecting with this trend and enabling people to choose for themselves which (small) projects they wish to donate to. The traditional development organisations are also responding to the trend towards more individual involvement, inter alia through the facilitation and implementation of interactive networks, such as the Oxfam Novib Doenersnet. The Netherlands have a leading role in Europe in terms of global citizenship. In 2009, Minister Bert Koenders determined that the present time calls for global citizenship (DGIS, 2009). The key element within the concept of global citizenship is the contribution made by individuals towards a liveable world. This no longer merely encompasses support for international cooperation, but also the way in which people’s involvement in international issues defines their behaviour. This is what the research ‘Global Citizenship in the Netherlands 2012’ evaluates.

1.1. What is Global Citizenship?

Early in 2012 NCDO published a theoretical exploration of the concept ‘global citizenship’ (Carabain et al, 2012). This exploration resulted in a definition of global citizenship. In this definition, global citizenship is considered to be the global dimension of active citizenship, in which the emphasis lies on the participation in and taking responsibility for the public sphere (“Foundation for Active Citizenship”, no year): “The global dimension of citizenship comes to the fore in behaviour that does justice to the principles of mutual dependency in the world, the equality of human beings, and shared responsibility for solving global issues.”

10

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


MUTUAL DEPENDENCY IN THE WORLD

BEHAVIOUR HUMAN EQUALITY

SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOLVING GLOBAL ISSUES

Figure 1. Graphic depiction of the definition

Behaviour forms the key element in this definition of global citizenship. It was previously concluded that good intentions have little impact on a better world. Good behaviour can be an effective contribution to a better world. Behaviour that is compatible with global citizenship does justice to three principles, i.e. human equality, mutual dependency in the world, and shared responsibility for solving global issues. All behaviours related to global citizenship (as described in this publication) do justice to these principles, but need not be consciously based on them. In other words: one can behave as a global citizen without consciously supporting these principles. Without making concrete statements on the causality of global citizenship behaviour, this publication will examine the extent of the correlation between the three principles and behaviours related to global citizenship.

1.2. Environmental and Social Sustainability

There are basically two types of behaviour related to global citizenship that should be distinguished. These types of behaviour are either linked to environmental sustainability or to social sustainability.

11

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Behaviours that may be associated with social sustainability are those related to social and economic justice (Carabain et al, 2012). In other words: these behaviours focus on human equality and distribution issues. Consumer behaviour, such as buying fair-trade products or not buying products made by children, may contribute to social sustainability. This also applies to active participation in a political party or trade union. Essential to behaviours related to environmental sustainability is awareness of the relationship between the needs of the present generation and the possibility of endangering the needs of future generations (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). This includes such behaviours as the efficient use of energy, water and waste, recycling, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, etc. For the time being, NCDO distinguishes nine types of behaviour associated with environmental or social sustainability: 1) efficient use of water and energy; 2) mobility, 3) recycling and handling of waste; 4) consumer behaviour; 5) searching for information and 6) expressing an opinion on global issues; 7) political participation; 8) donations to charity and 9) volunteering. NCDO considers these nine behaviours to be global citizenship. However, it should be noted that NCDO does not claim that this list is exhaustive. Following Kaiser and his colleagues (2003) it is stated that in particular behaviours in the field of saving energy and water, mobility and the re-use and handling of waste have a positive effect on environmental sustainability, whilst political participation mainly has a positive effect on social sustainability. With regard to other behaviours it is harder to distinguish between their effects on environmental or social sustainability. Consumer behaviour, searching for information and giving an opinion about global issues, donations to charitable organisations or volunteering may contribute to both environmental and social sustainability. 1.2.1. Efficient Use of Water and Energy The demand for water has increased significantly in the past decades due to population growth, the global increase in consumption and economic development. Water scarcity may have enormous consequences locally and globally. Water is not only essential for the people’s survival, but also for agriculture and many other economic processes (Spitz, 2012). People can contribute to the global fight against water scarcity by the efficient use of water in their own household. 12

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


With the imminent depletion of fossil fuels, the efficient use of energy is increasingly becoming a necessity instead of a choice. In addition, the efficient use of energy also contributes to the reduction of the carbon dioxide emissions that are a result of the combustion of these fuels (Muskens, 2012). This has negative consequences for the self-healing capacity of nature (OECD, 2012). A solution for the energy issues is the use of sustainable alternatives for fossil fuels. Anno 2012, these alternatives (including biomass and hydropower) only cover 13% of the global demand for energy. In its most positive scenario, the International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that the share of sustainable energy in 2035 will possibly rise to around 27% (IEA, 2011). However, there are reservations about this scenario. Others expect that, when the fossil fuel shortage becomes dire, mankind will be able to switch to sustainable energy sources much faster (Gilding, 2012). People can save energy in different ways and thus make a positive contribution to energy scarcity, for example, by properly insulating their homes and using energy-efficient equipment and by not leaving the lights on unnecessarily. 1.2.2. Mobility Mobility is linked to the global issue of energy scarcity. The expectation is that at a global level mobility will increase considerably in the next two decades, as a result of, amongst other things, economic growth in certain parts of the world and of urbanisation. The International Energy Agency predicts that the number of cars in the world in 2050 will increase by 250 to 375 per cent. Transportation currently produces 80% of all harmful air pollution and thus makes a substantial contribution to carbon dioxide emissions and to climate change in general. A sustainable approach to transportation, such as the avoidance of unnecessary motorised travel, the promotion of sustainable forms of mobility and the increase of transportation efficiency, make an important contribution to the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and the conservation of scarce resources (Repogle & Hughes, 2012). For example, people can address mobility more sustainably by travelling by public transport or using their bike as an alternative for the car to travel small distances. 1.2.3. Recycling & Handling of Waste Waste is one of the major global issues of our time. We now collectively produce an average of 12 billion tons of waste annually (OECD, 2012). The problem of waste is a relatively new phenomenon (Strasser, 1999). Until about 13

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


a century ago, waste was a small and mainly local problem (Carabain, Spitz & Keulemans, 2012). The fact that, nowadays, waste is a large, global problem is the result of two important changes in global society. Firstly, there is the rise of the consumer society with products made of non-natural materials that do not break down or cannot be easily recycled. Secondly, waste is increasingly being moved around. For instance, Western countries transport their waste to developing countries for recycling. In these countries large quantities of waste relatively often end up back in the environment, due to the lack of adequate organisational structures for collection and processing. Waste that ends up in the environment can constitute a danger to humans and animals (Carabain, Spitz & Keulemans, 2012). People can contribute individually to solving this global issue, for example by recycling, separating their waste, or by donating usable clothing and equipment for reuse. 1.2.4. Consumption Current global consumption patterns are leading to the over-burdening of the planet and of society (Mattar, 2012). It should also be born in mind that economic and population growth in emerging countries, such as China, India and Brazil, is irrevocably leading towards an increase in global consumption. Another global trend in consumption is the increase of global production chains and the decrease of local production chains. In other words, consumption of people who live in one place may influence the lives of people in other places. For example, think of the production of fruit and vegetables for Western consumers in East Africa for which the relatively scarce water and fertile soil ‘there’ is used for consumption ‘here’. Another example is the production of clothes and electronic products which, for economic reasons, usually takes place in the so-called ‘low-wage countries’ (NCDO, 2012). Eating meat is a specific aspect of consumer behaviour. The consumption of meat indirectly has a relatively large effect on environmental sustainability. The global production of meat and dairy products is responsible for 18% of the total greenhouse effect and 8% of global water consumption. Increased consumption of meat and dairy products could therefore lead to a severe environmental overload (Steinfeld et al, 2006). People can thus individually contribute to environmental sustainability by eating less meat and dairy products. Other examples of sustainable consumption are buying products with a sustainability or social approval label. An important aspect here is also the avoidance of wastage, for example of food (NCDO, 2012).

14

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


1.2.5. Searching for Information and Expressing an Opinion Finding and sharing information about global issues is also considered to be global citizenship behaviour. Informing oneself and/or sharing this information are forms of participation by means of which people deal with the global issues of our time. In this Kaiser and Wilson (2004) are followed, who consider searching for and sharing information related to the environment to be examples of social behaviour associated with environmental protection. Volunteering, donating and participating in civic organisations are considered to be the central components of citizen participation (Putnam, 1995). In this publication, no distinction is made between whether the contributing behaviour, volunteering or other form of (political) participation in civic organisations focuses on the Netherlands or abroad. At the beginning of this introduction it was already established that global citizenship encompasses contributions to solving problems ‘here and there’ and not just solving problems ‘there’. In addition, political participation, even in the minimal form of voting, influences what governments do (see e.g. Lehman Schlozman et al 1999). In many cases the influence of governments reaches beyond their national borders.

1.3. This Research

This research evaluates the extent to which Dutch citizens aged 18 years and older behave as global citizens. Its specific focus is on behaviours related to environmental or social sustainability. In addition, the extent to which Dutch adults support the principles of human equality, mutual dependency in the world and taking co-responsibility for solving global issues is considered. The report also includes an analysis of how global citizenship and support for the three principles are interrelated. Finally, the attitude of Dutch citizens towards development cooperation is reported.

15

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


chapter 2

behaviour Nine types of behaviour associated with global citizenship and based on social and environmental sustainability are distinguished. These behaviours focus on different aspects of energy and water consumption, mobility, recycling and waste, consumer behaviour, searching for information, political participation, expressing an opinion, making donations and volunteering. In the figures in this chapter, the percentage of Dutch adults who often or (almost) always show a certain behaviour is reported.1

Efficient Use of Energy and Water

With reference to the sheer waste of water and energy - such as leaving the tap running whilst brushing their teeth and leaving chargers in power points - the Dutch use energy in a responsible way. The vast majority of Dutch people exhibit behaviour that leads to less energy wastage. However, Dutch citizens are less responsible with energy when their convenience is involved, for example with their use of tumble dryers. Almost half (44%) use such device often or (almost) always. I use a tumble dryer

44

I leave the charger of my cell phone plugged in after charging

18

I leave the tap running whilst brushing my teeth

14

0

10

20

30

40

Figure 2.1 Efficient use of energy and water (% often or (almost) always, n=2250, weighted results)

Unfortunately, a good indicator of religiosity is missing in the dataset. The researchers are aware that ignoring this background characteristic may distort the results.

1

16

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012

50


Women are more efficient in their use of energy and water than men. Dutch people aged 35 years and older are more efficient in this field than their younger counterparts. Dutch people with secondary education2 are the least efficient with energy and water. Those in the lowest three income groups are more efficient in their use of water and energy than those who earn more (4th and 5th quintile). It seems very likely that sparing use in order to save costs also plays a role here. Dutch people who have higher altruistic values3 and those who make contact with other cultures more often are more efficient in their use of water and energy. Dutch citizens who vote for the VVD are less efficient with energy and water than the others. In contrast, those who vote for GroenLinks are relatively efficient in their use of water and energy.

2.2. Mobility

What choices do the Dutch make in the field of mobility? Do they opt for the train? Do they use the car to travel short distances? Only a small percentage of Dutch people indicate that they often or (almost) always opt for the train (16%). On the other hand, only a small percentage often or (almost) always uses the car within their neighbourhood (28%). About one out of five Dutch people often or (almost) always fly when going on holiday.

The educational level has been divided into three levels. Low = primary school/lower (lbo)/upper-technical and vocational training (vbo) and preparatory secondary vocational training (vmbo) management and vocational programme / lower general secondary education (mavo) / first three years of higher general secondary education (havo) and pre-university education (vwo)/ preparatory secondary vocational training (vmbo) (theoretical and combined programmes). Secondary = secondary technical and vocational training (mbo)/ higher general secondary education (havo) and pre-university education (vwo) upper school/university (wo) and higher vocational education (hbo) propaedeutic year or higher. High = higher vocational education (hbo)\ university (wo) bachelor or bachelor / university (wo) doctoral or master.

2 

Scales have been constructed from altruistic values, trust and contact with other cultures. For more information about the scale structure and the items in the scales we refer to the research methodology of this report that may be downloaded from the website www.ncdo.nl.

3

17

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


I travel by train

16

When going on holiday, I travel by plane

21

If I need to go somewhere within my neighbourhood, I take the car

28

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Figure 2.2 Mobility (% often or (almost) always, n=2250, weighted results)

Women behave more sustainably than men with regard to mobility. Dutch people with a higher education behave the most sustainably when it comes to mobility. Those with the highest incomes behave the least sustainably. This effect remains when we check for the possession of a car. In other words: Dutch people with low incomes who own a car still behave more sustainably than those with higher income who also own a car. Dutch citizens who have higher altruistic values behave more sustainably when it comes to mobility. Also those with more social and institutional trust make more sustainable choices in this area. Dutch people who vote for the VVD and PVV are relatively speaking the least sustainable in terms of mobility. Those who vote for D66, the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) and in particular people who vote for GroenLinks make the most sustainable choices in the area of mobility.

2.3. Recycling and Handling of Waste

The Dutch seem to be responsible in their handling of waste. Only a small percentage (12%) often throws away food that is actually still edible and this percentage also applies to disposing of batteries with other waste (11%). Also a significant percentage of the Dutch population donate goods so that they can be reused (41%). Women recycle more and deal more responsibly with their waste than men.Dutch people aged 35 years and older also behave more responsibly in this than younger Dutch people. More highly educated people in the Netherlands behave more responsibly in this regard than those with a secondary and lower education. On the other hand, those who reside in the Randstad [ring of cities in the central west of the Netherlands, transl.] behave less responsibly in this than those who live outside the Randstad. 18

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


I donate goods (clothing, shoes, computers, etc.)

41

I throw away leftover food, even when it is still edible

12

At home I dispose empty batteries with other waste

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

Figure 2.3 Recycling and disposal of waste (% often or (almost) always, n = 2250, weighted results)

Dutch people with higher altruistic values behave more sustainably in their dealings with waste and recycling. Also those who have more social and institutional trust make more sustainable choices in this area. With regard to waste handling and recycling, the sustainable behaviour of Dutch people who do not vote or vote for the PVV and VVD is relatively limited. In contrast, people who vote for GroenLinks and D66 deal relatively responsibly with their waste and recycling.

2.4. Consumer Behaviour

Are the Dutch sustainable consumers? Several aspects of consumer behaviour are highlighted. Apart from opting for green power (48%), the Dutch citizen seems only to a limited extent to be a sustainable consumer. Only 12% of the Dutch often or (almost) always buy fair-trade products and also the compensation of flights is not yet common behaviour amongst Dutch citizens. Only 3% of the Dutch take the opportunity to compensate their flights. Also only a small percentage buy second-hand goods (15%). In addition, the vast majority of the Dutch population often or (almost) always eats meat (82%). Women and Dutch people aged 35 years and older behave more often as a sustainable consumer than men and younger Dutch people. Those with a higher education consume more sustainably than those with a secondary or lower education. However, Dutch people in the two lowest income groups consume more sustainably than those in the highest income group. The difference between these groups mainly appears to be that the Dutch with low incomes more often have a contract for green power and more often buy second-hand goods. Dutch people with higher altruistic values consume more sustainably. Also those who more often come into contact with other cultures and those with more social and institutional trust are more sustainable consumers. 19

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


In my household we have a subscription to green power*

48

I buy second-hand goods

15

I buy fairtrade products

12

The money on my bank account is invested in things that are beneficial for people, nature and climate (green / sustainable savings)*

11

I compensate for CO2 emission after flying (paying an extra amount to plant trees)

3

I buy products, even though I know they are made by children

6

I eat meat

82

0

20

40

60

80

100

Figure 2.4 Consumer Behaviour (% yes (*) and often or (almost) always, n = 2250, weighted results)

PVV, CDA and VVD voters and Dutch citizens who do not vote consume less sustainably. Those who vote for GroenLinks are by far the most sustainable consumers.

2.5. Searching for Information about Global Issues

The vast majority of the Dutch follow the news about problems abroad. It is remarkable that this is done mainly through the so-called ‘old’ media, such as newspapers, television and radio (74%). The percentage of Dutch citizens who follow this news over the internet is still much lower (39%). I follow the news about problems in the world through television, radio and newspapers

74

I follow the news about problems in the world over the internet

39

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 2.5 Search for information (% often or (almost) always, n = 2250, weighted results)

Men and Dutch people aged 35 years and older follow the news about problems in the world more often than women and younger Dutch people. Those with a higher education follow the news on global issues more often than those with a secondary or lower education. Those with a secondary education follow the 20

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


news more often than those with a lower education. Dutch people in the highest 20% income group follow the news about problems in the world more often than those who earn less. Dutch people who more frequently come into contact with other cultures more often follow the news about problems in the world. Even when, There is also a moderately positive relationship between searching for information and altruistic values and social and institutional trust. The Dutch who vote for D66, VVD and GroenLinks more often follow the news about problems in the world. Those who do not vote follow the news by far the least.

2.6. Expressing an Opinion on Global Issues

To what extent do Dutch people express their opinions on global issues? About one out of eight often or (almost) always speak out if family or friends do something that is not good for the environment. These percentages are much higher if we also take into account those who sometimes talk about this subject. Then 77% of Dutch people talk about poverty and 75% talk about environmental problems. Only a very small percentage of Dutch people often signs an (online) petition (5%) or supports charitable organisations via the social media (4%).

14

I speak out if family or friends do something that is not good for the environment 12

I talk about environmental problems 11

I talk about global poverty 5

I sign (online) petitions 4

I support charitable organisations via the social media 0

3

6

9

12

15

Figure 2.6 Expressing an opinion (% often or (almost) always, n = 2250, weighted results)

Women express their opinion on global issues more often than men. Dutch people with a higher education express their opinion more often than those with a secondary education, whilst the latter group expresses its opinion more often than those with a lower education. Also those in the two lowest income groups express their opinion on global issues more often than those who earn more. 21

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


This difference is caused by the fact that Dutch people from the lowest income groups talk more about poverty and seem to be more active online. Dutch people with higher altruistic values give their opinion more often. Also those who have more contact with other cultures do this more often. Trust plays a limited role in giving an opinion. CDA, VVD and PVV voters express their opinion on global issues relatively infrequently, in contrast to people voting for GroenLinks and the other parties. They express their opinion on these issues relatively often.

2.7. Political Participation

Three aspects of political participation are measured: voting in elections; being a member of a trade union and active membership of a political party. Voting in elections is by far the most popular form of political participation. Most Dutch people (80%) vote often or (almost) always in elections. Approximately a quarter is a trade union member. Only a very small proportion (3%) is an active member of a political party. I vote if elections are held

80 23

I am a member of a trade union* I am an active member of a political party* 3 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 2.7 Political participation (% yes (*) and often or (almost) always, n = 2250, weighted results)

Men are more often politically active than women. Older Dutch citizens are also more politically active than younger citizens. The more highly educated are most active in the political arena, followed by those with a secondary and lower education. Those who earn more (the top 3 quintiles) are more active in the field of politics than those in the lowest income groups. Dutch people who are more altruistic and those who have more trust in institutions exhibit a higher degree of political participation. This also applies to those who have more contact with other cultures and who have a greater amount of social trust. 22

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


The Dutch who vote for Partij van de Arbeid (the Dutch Labour Party), D66, and the small Christian parties are relatively active in terms of political participation.

2.8. Donating to Charity 2.8.1. Who Donates to Which Charitable Organisations? The Dutch donate relatively often. When we look at all sectors, three quarters of the Dutch donate to charity. Dutch contributors donate relatively often to development aid, nature and the environment. In addition, a relatively large group of Dutch people say they donate to ‘another’ charity. This is probably connected to the fact that in this study the category ‘health’ has not been explicitly presented to the respondents. From the answers to the open questions it is thus apparent that the majority of the donations reported in the “other” category were gifts to charitable organisations in the field of healthcare. Women donate more often than men and also older Dutch people donate more often than younger Dutch people. Those with a higher education donate the most to charity in the Netherlands, followed by those with a secondary and then a lower education. The Dutch with lower incomes (the two lowest income groups) donate less often than those who earn more. 75

All sectors 38

Development aid 33

Nature & environment 30

Other 19

Religious and ideological causes Sports

15

Human rights

15 11

Neighbourhood activities 0

10

20

30

40

Figure 2.8 Donations to charity (givers%, n = 2250, weighted results).

23

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012

50

60

70

80


Dutch citizens who attach more importance to altruistic values and have more trust in institutions donate more often to charity. This also applies to people who more often have contact with other cultures and to people with more social trust. PVV voters and people who do not vote donate the least often and supporters of the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) donate the most often. 2.8.2. How Much is Donated? In 2011 Dutch donors gave on average 224 euros to charity. There are major differences between the amounts of the average donations per sector. Traditionally, the greatest average amounts are given to ideological organisations such as churches and mosques (see for example Schuyt et al. 2011). Amongst Dutch donors an average of 359 euros was given to ideological organisations, such as churches, mosques or temples. Dutch people aged 35 years and older donate greater amounts than younger Dutch people. Those with a higher education donate the greatest amounts, followed by those with a secondary education, who in turn donate greater amounts than those with a lower education. Dutch people with the highest incomes (4th and 5th quintile) donate greater amounts than those who earn less. The Dutch who support higher altruistic values and have more trust in institutions donate greater amounts. 224

All sectors (n=1678)

359

Religious and ideological causes (n=427) Development aid (n=834)

102

Other (n=665)

99 54

Nature and environment (n=734)

45

Human rights (n=333) Neighbourhood activities (n=249)

30

Sports (n=326)

29

0

50

100

150

200

Figure 2.9 Donations to charity (average gift, n = 2250, weighted results)

24

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012

250

300

350

400


The Dutch who vote for the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) donate by far the greatest amounts. On average relatively low amounts are donated by those who vote for the PVV, SP and those who do not vote.

2.9. Volunteering 2.9.1. Who is Active as a Volunteer and Where? Volunteering is also part of the global dimension of citizenship. Forty-two percent of the Dutch perform voluntary activities. These voluntary activities are not evenly distributed over the different sectors. The category ‘other’ is the biggest. This category shows the diversity of the Dutch voluntary sector, ranging from activities at school, committing as a volunteer for the Home Owners Association (VVE) to collecting for the KWF and managing the brass band. Sports clubs, community centres and houses of worship (for example churches, mosques and temples) are also popular places for performing voluntary activities. Dutch people with a higher education are more often active as a volunteer, followed by those with a secondary education (who in turn are more often active as a volunteer than those with a lower education). Those residing outside the Randstad are more likely to be active as a volunteer than those residing in the Randstad. 42

All sectors 16

Other 12

Sports 10

Neighbourhood activities 8

Religious and ideological causes Development aid

1

Nature and environment

1

Human rights

1

0

10

20

30

Figure 2.10 Voluntary activities per sector (% of volunteers, n = 2250, weighted results)

25

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012

40

50


Dutch people who have higher altruistic values and more trust in institutions are more often active as volunteers. Contact with other cultures and social trust has a slight positive effect on the possibility that people perform voluntary activities. The Dutch who vote for the small Christian parties are relatively speaking most often active as volunteers. Those who vote for the PVV, SP and the other parties and those who do not vote are the least often active as volunteers. 2.9.2. Do the Dutch Work Regularly as Volunteers? Subsequently, the frequency with which the Dutch perform voluntary activities in the different sectors was considered. Dutch people who are active as volunteers appear to be so on an extremely regular basis: 73% of the Dutch volunteers are active at least once a month. The houses of worship in the Netherlands are most able to rely on volunteers, who are active at least once a month. All sectors (n=942)

73 79

Religious and ideological causes (n=182) 72

Other (n=352) 68

Sports (n=256) 65

Neighbourhood activities (n=241) 53

Human rights (n=15) Nature and environment(n=36)

50

Development aid (n=30)

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 2.11 At least 1 x per month working as volunteer by sector (% volunteers, n = 2250, weighted results)

Amongst the volunteers, men and the over 35s are more often active as volunteers than women and Dutch people younger than 35. This is particularly the case for men of retirement age. This does not mean that men and Dutch people aged 35 years and older in general perform voluntary activities more often than women and younger Dutch people, but that when they do work as volunteers they do so more frequently than the women and younger Dutch 26

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


people who are also active as volunteers. Dutch people who attach a greater importance to altruistic values are also more often active as a volunteer at least once a month.

2.10. Global Citizenship Index

In the previous paragraphs different types of global citizenship behaviour have been reported on separately. In this paragraph an Global Citizenship Index which includes all the previously discussed behaviours is presented. An index has been constructed in which people can score a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 100. Someone who scores a 100 has exhibited all the global citizenship behaviours (as defined in this publication) often or (almost) always during the past year, and someone who scores a 0 has not exhibited any. Women behave as global citizens slightly more often than men. This also applies to Dutch people aged 35 years and older. The more highly educated Dutch people behave the most like global citizens, followed by those with a secondary and lower education. 39

All

39

Gender: Female 38

Male 36

Age: 18 to 35 years

40

35 years and older 36

Education: Low

38

Secondary

42

High Income: 1st quintile

40

2nd quintile

40

3rd quintile

39

4th quintile

39

5th quintile

39

0

10

20

30

40

Figure 2.12 Global Citizenship Index (average scores scale 0-100, n = 2250, weighted results).

27

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012

50


39

All

40

CDA

42

PvDA 40

SP 37

VVD

36

PVV

47

GROEN LINKS CU/SGP

43

D66

43

Other

43 35

Non voters 0

10

20

30

40

50

Figure 2.13 Global Citizenship Index and political preference (average scores scale 0-100, n = 2250, weighted results).

The relationship between Dutch citizens’ political preferences and global citizenship behaviours was also considered. There are large differences between the voters for different political parties. Those who vote for GroenLinks have by far the highest score in the Index Global Citizenship, whereas PVV and VVD voters have a relatively low score. Dutch people who attach more importance to altruistic values, those who have more contact with other cultures and those with more social and institutional trust behave more often as global citizens.

28

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


39

All 33

Altruistic values: low

38

middle

44

high 36

Interaction with other cultures: low

39

middle

41

high 36

Social trust: low

38

middle

41

high 36

Institutional trust: low

40

middle

42

high 0

10

20

30

40

50

Figure 2.14 Global Citizenship Index and altruism, interaction with other cultures, social and institutional trust (average scores scale 0-100, n = 2250, weighted results).

2.11. Conclusion

In general we can say that the Dutch do not act extensively as global citizens. There are differences to be found between the different types of behaviours related to environmental and social sustainability. Some behaviour - such as efficient use of energy and water, handling of waste, donating to charity, searching for information, expressing an opinion on global issues and volunteering - are more common than political participation, sustainable consumer behaviour and mobility. There is still much ground to be won in these last two categories. Women behave more often as global citizens than men for almost all the categories of global citizenship. There are a few interesting exceptions, i.e. ‘following the news about global problems’ and ‘political participation’. This is done more often by men. Education plays an important role in global citizenship. Dutch people with a higher education more often behave as global citizens than Dutch people with a lower education. The role of income in relation to global citizenship is more complex. There are some types of behaviour - such as being efficient in the use of energy and water, expressing an opinion on global issues, mobility and consumer 29

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


behaviour - in which the Dutch with lower incomes more often behave as global citizens than those who earn more. On the other hand, behaviours such as “searching for information” and “political participation” are more often demonstrated by Dutch people with higher incomes. With reference to age, it can be observed that Dutch people aged 35 years and older more often behave as global citizens than younger Dutch people. Whether the Dutch reside in the Randstad or not plays a modest role with regard to global citizenship; only in the field of recycling and handling of waste was any difference found. People who attach more importance to altruistic values more often behave as global citizens. Also more social and political trust increases the probability that a person will behave as a global citizen. Political trust seems to be a prerequisite for political participation and commitment as a volunteer. Altruism is especially important when it comes to donating to charity, waste and recycling, expressing an opinion and whether or not voluntary work is done. The extent of interaction with other cultures plays a particular role with regard to following the news about global problems. With reference to political preferences, a number of trends may be distinguished. In general, we can say that people who vote for PVV and VVD behave relatively little as global citizens, whilst GroenLinks and D66 voters do so relatively often. The voters for the so-called small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) also often behave as global citizens, particularly in the fields of mobility, donations to charity and volunteering. In chapter 5, the interaction between these different personal characteristics is looked at more closely.

30

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


31

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


CHAPTER 3

PRINCIPLES Three principles have been distinguished which are expected to exhibit an association with the behaviour of a global citizen: human equality, an awareness of mutual dependence and the taking of (shared) responsibility for solving global issues. In this chapter, the extent to which the Dutch support these principles will be described.

3.1. Human Equality

We looked at various aspects emphasising the principle of human equality, i.e. faith, the right to work, the superiority of the Dutch, the proximity of people from other cultures, freedom of expression and standards and values. The Dutch turn out to support the principle of equality more often in the areas of freedom of expression and standards and values than in the areas of religion, the right to work, the superiority of the Netherlands and the proximity of people from other cultures. The principle of human equality is on average endorsed by slightly more than half of the Dutch. Women endorse assertions in which human equality is central more often than men. Dutch people with a higher and secondary education also do this more often than those with a lower education. Dutch people who attach more value to altruistic values endorse the principle of human equality more often. Also Dutch people who have more contact with other cultures and those with more social and institutional trust support this principle more often. The Dutch who vote for GroenLinks support the principle of human equality relatively more often. The Dutch who vote for the PVV and the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) endorse this principle less often. That voters for the small Christian parties endorse the principle of humans equality less often 32

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


can be fully retraced to the first assertion ‘I think Christianity is just as good or bad as the Islam ‘. If this assertion is removed from the analysis, the extent to which the voters for the small Christian parties support the principle of equality does not deviate in a negative sense. 50

I believe Islam is just as good or bad as Christianity I believe that I should have a better chance of finding a job in the Netherlands than a Polish citizen who is looking for work here

49

In the Netherlands, we are richer than people in poor countries because we organize things better

48

I prefer people from my own culture living next to me rather than people from a different culture

45

Freedom of speech is less important to people in poor countries than it is to people in the Netherlands

23

I believe the norms and values of my own culture are better than those of other cultures

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

Figure 3.1 Equality (% (fully) agree, n = 2025 (min), weighted results).

3.2. Mutual Dependency in the World

The principle of mutual dependency in the world mainly covers the awareness of relationships between ‘here’ and ‘there’. The vast majority of the Dutch seem aware of the relationship between the price of clothes in the Netherlands and the low wages of the people in poor countries who make the clothes (72%). Also the majority of the Dutch population sees the link between the careless treatment of nature elsewhere and the climate in the Netherlands (the felling of large forests and the melting of the ice caps). Only a small percent of the Dutch think that we do not need other countries in order to make money. In general, we can assert that the vast majority of the Dutch seem aware of the mutual dependency in the world. Dutch people with a higher education are more aware of mutual dependency in the world than Dutch people with a secondary and lower education. Also Dutch people who earn more are more often aware of this than those who earn less.

33

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Some clothing in the Netherlands is cheap because it is made in poor countries, by people earning a low wage

72

Protecting the rainforests in Brazil, i.e. preventing them from being cut down, is good for the climate in the Netherlands

71

I can make a contribution to solving global problems through the choices that I make in day-to-day life

37

The Netherlands do not need other countries in order to earn money

8

The melting of the ice-caps at the North and South Poles does not affect us in the Netherlands

7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 3.2 Mutual dependency (% (fully) agree, n = 1984 (min), weighted results).

Dutch people who have higher altruistic values are more aware of mutual dependency in the world. Also Dutch people who more frequently come into contact with other cultures and those who have more social and institutional trust are more aware of this. The Dutch who vote for GroenLinks, D66, the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) are relatively often aware that there is mutual dependency in the world. The Dutch who do not vote and those who have voted for the PVV, have a relatively low awareness of this dependency.

3.3. Shared Responsibility for Solving Global Issues

To what extent are the Dutch willing to share the responsibility for solving global issues? Where victims of natural disasters are concerned, the vast majority of Dutch people agree that they should be helped (72%). Where a more general principle is involved that focuses on problems in poor countries, it is apparent that a much smaller part of the Dutch population (42%) feel responsibility for this. It is also striking that a quarter of the Dutch feel responsible for the poverty in the world. Dutch people with a higher education are more willing to take responsibility for solving global issues than Dutch people with a secondary education, but the latter group is more willing to take up this responsibility than Dutch people with a lower education. Also Dutch people with the highest incomes are more willing to take responsibility than those in the two lowest income groups. 34

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


People have a joint responsibility to help the victims of natural disasters across the globe

72

The Netherlands must help poor countries to solve their problems

42

I feel responsible when I see other people in the world suffering in poverty

27

The Netherlands should not interfere with how other countries treat their natural environment

15

People in poor countries must solve their poverty themselves

15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Figure 3.3 Shared responsibility (% (fully) agree, n = 2183 (min), weighted results).

Dutch people who have higher altruistic values are also more willing to take global responsibility. This also applies to the Dutch who have more social and institutional trust and those who have more interaction with other cultures. The Dutch who vote for GroenLinks and the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) are the most willing to take responsibility for solving global issues, and the Dutch who vote for the PVV the least.

3.4. Conclusion

The principles of human equality, the awareness of mutual dependency and the taking of shared responsibility for solving global issues are widely supported by the Dutch population. This particularly applies to the two last principles and to a lesser extent to the human equality. Education plays an important role in the extent to which the Dutch support these principles. Dutch people with a higher education more often support the three principles than whose with a lower education. Three other personal characteristics play a separate role with regard to the three principles. Women see humans as more equal than men do. The older Dutch are more willing to take responsibility than the youth. The Dutch who earn more are more aware of the mutual dependency in the world. Also the extent to which people attach importance to altruistic values plays an important role in the extent to which they support the three principles. This particularly applies to the willingness to take (co)responsibility. In addition, the extent of trust that the Dutch have in institutions plays a relatively 35

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


important role. People with more trust in them support the principles to a greater extent. What role does political preference play in support for the three principles? In this a fairly clear pattern can be seen: the Dutch who vote for GroenLinks and D66 support the principles the most. Also the Dutch who vote for the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) score well on the principles. The Dutch voting for PVV have less support for all of the principles. In chapter 5, a closer look is taken at the interaction between these three principles and the various personal characteristics.

36

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


CHAPTER 4

KNOWLEDGE ABOUT GLOBAL ISSUES To form an impression of Dutch people’s knowledge about global issues, nine multiple-choice questions were submitted to the respondents. The subjects of these questions are derived from the UN Millennium Declaration and the Millennium Development Goals. There are large differences in the knowledge about the various global issues amongst the Dutch. Almost all the Dutch know about the cause of malaria or know the name of the Chancellor of Germany. However, there seems to be a lot less knowledge about the educational participation of girls and child labour. 96

How do you get infected by malaria? Who is the Chancellor of Germany?

94 85

In which country is now a civil war going on? 66

Which animal is endangered? Which country has the highest percentage of hungry people?

51

Which disease is the leading cause of death in young children in poor countries?

49

Who is the State Secretary for Development Cooperation at the moment?

41

Which country has relatively the lowest girls' school enrolment rates in the world?

38

Which country has the highest percentage of child workers under the age of 14?

32

0

20

40

60

80

100

Figure 4.1 Knowledge about global issues (% answered correctly, n = 2250, weighted results)

On average, the Dutch answer 5.5 out of the nine questions correctly. If we convert this to a 10-point scale it appears that the Dutch population barely scores a six with regard to knowledge about global issues. 37

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Men have a little more knowledge about global issues than women (on average 5.7 v. 5.3 correct answers). This also applies to the Dutch aged 35 years and older compared to those who are younger. Dutch people with a higher education have more knowledge than those with a secondary education. The latter group has more knowledge about global issues than Dutch people with a lower education (resp. on average 6.2, 5.4 and 4.7 correct answers). The Dutch with the lowest incomes (1st and 2nd quintile) have less knowledge of global issues than those with higher incomes (on average 5.1 versus 6.1 correct answers). People who reside in the Randstad are able to answer more questions correctly than people elsewhere (on average 5.6 versus 5.4 correct answers). The Dutch who have more contact with other cultures and more trust in institutions have more knowledge about global issues. The Dutch who vote for D66, VVD and GroenLinks have a relatively large amount of knowledge about global issues. Non-voters and Dutch voting for the PVV have relatively little knowledge about these issues.

38

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


chapter 5

global citizenship In the previous chapters the extent to which the Dutch behave as global citizens has been reported, as well as the extent to which they support the principles of the human equality, mutual dependency and shared responsibility for solving global issues. In this chapter the correlation between the principles and the behaviours are reported. Also the cohesion between knowledge about global issues and support of the three principles and behaviour is examined. In short, in this chapter an attempt will be made to provide more insight into which aspects play a role in the extent to which the Dutch behave as global citizens.

5.1. The Role of the Principles

The definition of global citizenship as employed by NCDO suggests a positive cohesion between the support of the principles and global citizenship. Figure 5.1 shows the cohesion between the various principles themselves and the cohesion between the principles and behaviour (based on scores on the Global Citizenship Index). The expectation that people who subscribe more to these three principles are more likely to behave as global citizens (Carabain et al 2012), seems to be confirmed by the data collected. The Dutch who subscribe more to the principle of human equality, mutual dependency in the world and, in particular, of taking shared responsibility for solving global issues are more likely to behave as global citizens. Note: only the cohesion between behaviour and the three principles, and the cohesion between the three principles are treated here. This therefore does not say anything about the direction of this cohesion4.

It is still unclear whether the cohesion that is found is also causal (in the sense that the endorsement of principles leads to more behaviour). Theoretically, it is possible that this relation works the other way around, and that people who show more behaviour for example feel more shared responsibility. For this reason, the same research will be carried out next year with the same respondents (longitudinal study plan). With this data correlations can be examined for causality.

4 

39

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


There is a difference in the extent of cohesion between the various principles and the behaviours related to global citizenship. The principle of shared responsibility for solving global issues appears to be best able to explain differences in the extent of global citizenship; 17% of the behavioural differences initially found can be explained by the extent to which people are willing to take (shared) responsibility for solving global issues. The sense of mutual dependency explains 11% of the differences in the extent of global citizenship behaviour and the principle of human equality only 6%.5 MUTUAL DEPENDENCY IN THE WORLD

.32

.33

.53

BEHAVIOUR .41

HUMAN EQUALITY

.25

SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOLVING GLOBAL ISSUES

.41

Figure 5.1 Cohesion between behaviour and principles and behaviour 6, n = 2159 (min).7

These results are not reported in a table, for further information please contact the authors of this publication.

5

The figures are correlation coefficients. These correlation coefficients represent the strength of a linear relationship between the principles and the scores on the Global Citizenship Index. The values of correlation coefficients can be between -1 and +1. The closer the value of the correlation coefficient is to 1, the stronger the constructs are positively correlated.

6

7

40

All the reported correlations are significant at 0.01 level.

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Up to now, the explanatory capacity of the three principles have been examined separately. From here on, the joint contributions of the three principles towards the explanation of differences in the extent to which the Dutch behave as global citizens will be examined. Table 5.1 (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Beta8 Human equality

.08**

Mutual dependency

.15**

Shared responsibility

.30**

Adjusted R2

.19

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

It is noteworthy that if all three principles are included simultaneously in the explanatory model the combined explanatory power of all three principles is scarcely more than the principle of the taking of shared responsibility for solving global issues on its own. The percentage of explained variance in behaviour only increases by 2% from 17% to 19%. In summary, it may be concluded that there is a positive relationship between the principles of human equality, mutual dependency in the world and the taking of (shared) responsibility for solving global issues. Below, a closer look is taken at the relationship between these three principles and complementary aspects (such as knowledge about global issues and personal characteristics) with reference to global citizenship.

The reported Beta is the standardised regression coefficient. These Betas are generally between -1 and +1. The constant in the regression is equal to 0 in the case of standardised regression coefficients.

8

41

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


5.2. The Role of Knowledge

People who have more knowledge about global issues more often behave as global citizens than those who have less knowledge about these issues. Knowledge about global issues alone explains 6% of the differences in global citizenship behaviours. Table 5.2 Knowledge and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with Knowledge

Basemodel with Knowledge

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.07**

Mutual dependency

.15**

.11**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.29**

Knowledge Adjusted R2

.19

.24**

.12**

.06

.20

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

If knowledge is added to the basemodel with the three principles, the effects of these three principles on global citizenship behaviour remain almost unchanged. The percentage of explained variance in the differences in global citizenship behaviours only increases by 1%. The effect of mutual dependency and in particular the effect of knowledge do, however, decrease in this model. There is a clear cohesion between knowledge and the principle of mutual dependency. In other words: people with more knowledge have a better sense of mutual dependency in the world, which partially explains the initial positive effect of knowledge.

42

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


5.3. The Role of Personal Characteristics

Earlier in this publication a number of personal characteristics were already identified which were positively associated with various manifestations of global citizenship behaviour. Table 5.3 Personal characteristics and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with personal characteristics

Basemodel with personal characteristics

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.05**

Mutual dependency

.15**

.13**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.27**

Female

.08**

.05*

Age

.28**

.23**

Education

.32**

.19**

Household income

-.09**

-.11**

Living in 'Randstad'

.00

-.01

.14

.25

Adjusted R2

.19

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

When these characteristics are examined together, it appears that gender (female), age and education all have a positive effect on the Global Citizenship Index. However, gross annual income has a negative effect: the higher the income, the less the behaviours found. These characteristics jointly explain 14% of the observed difference in behaviour. When the personal characteristics are added to the basemodel containing the three principles, the originally observed effects of these principles are preserved. In the case of the personal characteristics it is remarkable that the originally observed positive effect of education - and especially gender - is reduced. It may be deduced that the more highly educated - and in particular women - often support the three principles, which partially explains their more frequent behaviour compared to the less well educated and men.

43

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


The personal characteristics taken together explain an additional part of the differences in the extent of global citizenship behaviour that cannot be explained by the three principles alone. With the addition of the personal characteristics to the basemodel, the explained variance increases from 19% to 25%.

5.4. The role of Altruistic Values, Contact with Other Cultures and Trust

The results below show that altruistic values, having contact with other cultures and the amount of social and institutional trust all have a positive cohesion with the extent to which people behave as global citizens. Table 5.4 Altruistic values and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with altruistic values

Basemodel with altruistic values

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.05*

Mutual dependency

.15**

.13**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.20**

Altruistic values Adjusted R2

.19

.41**

.26**

.17

.24

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

The importance attached to altruistic values has a strong positive effect on global citizenship. The higher the values, the more frequent the behaviour. Altruistic values explain 17% of the observed difference in behaviour. This is almost as much as the three principles together. The addition of altruistic values to the basemodel reduces the earlier observed effects of the three principles. In particular, the effect of the endorsement of human equality on global citizenship is almost reasoned away. The principle of equality thus appears to explain a major part of global citizenship, because people who endorse this principle also attach a greater importance to altruistic values, which has a strong positive effect on the extent to which they behave as global citizens. In spite of the effect of altruistic values on the extent to which 44

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


people behave as global citizens, the originally observed effects of the three principles are partially preserved. With the addition of altruistic values, 5% additional variance is explained. Table 5.5 Contact other cultures and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with contact with other cultures

Basemodel with contact with other cultures

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.06**

Mutual dependency

.15**

.13**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.30**

Contact with other cultures Adjusted R2

.19

.20**

.13**

.04

.21

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

Also in the case of contact with other cultures, there is a positive effect on global citizenship behaviour. The more frequent this contact, the more people behave as global citizens. In this case, after the addition of this contact to the basemodel the effect of the three principles is hardly reduced, and also the effect of this contact is preserved. This latter effect does however decrease significantly. This implies that people who often have contact with other cultures more often endorse the three principles and therefore more often exhibit global citizenship behaviour, and not vice versa. With the addition of contact with other cultures a 2% additional variance is explained with respect to the basemodel. Table 5.6 Social trust and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

45

Basemodel

Model with social trust

Basemodel with social trust

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.07**

Mutual dependency

.15**

.14**

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Shared responsibility

.30**

Social trust Adjusted R

2

.19

.29** .16**

.09**

.03

.20

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

Social trust has a positive effect on global citizenship behaviour. The more social trust, the more people behave like global citizens. Also in the case of social trust, after its addition to the basemodel the originally observed effect of the three principles is hardly reduced. The positive effect of social trust is also preserved, but does decrease in strength. This implies that people with more social trust more often endorse the three principles and therefore more often exhibit global citizenship behaviour, and not vice versa. With the addition of social trust the explained variance increases by only 1%. Table 5.7 Institutional trust and global citizenship behaviour (n = 2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with social trust

Basemodel with social trust

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.07**

Mutual dependency

.15**

.14**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.29**

Institutional trust Adjusted R2

.19

.22**

.07**

.05

.20

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

Institutional trust has a positive effect on global citizenship behaviour: the higher the institutional trust, the more frequent the behaviour. Taken separately, institutional trust separately explains 5% of the observed difference in behaviour. After the addition of institutional trust to the basemodel, the effect of the three principles is hardly reduced. The effect of social trust is also preserved, but loses vigour. This implies that people with more trust in institutions more often endorse the three principles and therefore more often exhibit global citizenship behaviour, and not vice versa. The addition of institutional trust increases the explained variance by only 1% increase.

46

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


5.5. The Effect of All the Aspects Together

Finally, a model is presented which includes all aspects. In this model, a number of interesting shifts can be observed. Table 5.8 Principles, personal characteristics and global citizenship behaviour (n=2250, unweighted results)

Basemodel

Model with personal characteristics

Basemodel with personal characteristics

Beta

Beta

Beta

Human equality

.08**

.00

Mutual dependency

.15**

.09**

Shared responsibility

.30**

.17**

Knowledge

.11**

.07**

Female

.03

.03

Age

.21**

.21**

Education

.16**

.13**

Household income

-.11**

-.11**

Living in 'Randstad'

-.01

-.01

Altruistic values

.32**

.23**

Contact with other cultures

.11**

.11**

Social trust

.04

.04

Institutional trust

.06*

.02

.29

.31

Adjusted R2

.19

Significance: *p<.05, **p<.01

When a control has been carried out for all the background characteristics (excluding principles), it appears that the level of knowledge and education, contact with other cultures, age, institutional trust, and particularly altruistic values all have a positive effect on global citizenship. The higher the gross household income, the less the behaviour exhibited. It was already noted earlier that this negative correlation can partially be found in the fact that people with low incomes more often have a subscription to green power, and more often buy second-hand products. 47

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Furthermore, it is significant that in this complete model the positive effect of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;being a womanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; disappears. Table 5.3 already showed that after the addition of the three principles this gender effect was greatly reduced. Now there appears to be no difference at all between men and women. It may be concluded from this that women very probably exhibit behaviour related to global citizenship because they attach more importance to altruistic values than men. The previously observed positive effect of social trust also disappears. When the models are merged, an important result is that the positive effects of the three principles decrease with respect to the basemodel. The coefficients of mutual dependency and shared responsibility are almost halved, and the effect of equality on global citizenship even disappears entirely. In particular, altruistic values appear to be a very important factor in explaining differences in the extent to which people behave as global citizens. Since these values are closely related to the endorsement of the three principles (as already seen earlier in Table 5.4), this also explains a large part of the originally observed positive effect of the three principles on global citizenship in the basemodel. This also applies to most of the other background characteristics for which a positive effect on citizenship was observed earlier. The Dutch with a higher level of education, more knowledge about global issues, more contact with other cultures and those aged 35 years and older, score higher in the index, also after a control has been carried out for the three principles.

5.6. Conclusion

In this chapter, the relationships between the three principles and behaviours related to global citizenship have been examined in more detail, as also the effect of the cohesion between various background characteristics and the support for the three principles on the behaviour. The expectation that people who exhibit more support for the three principles more frequently behave as global citizens seems to be confirmed by the collected data. The Dutch who exhibit more support for the principles of human equality, mutual dependency and shared responsibility for solving global issues are more often inclined to behave as global citizens. The regression analysis further shows that in particular the principle of shared responsibility for solving global issues is best able to explain differences in the extent of global citizenship. 48

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Also other background characteristics appear to partially explain differences in behaviour. People who have more knowledge about global issues more often behave as global citizens than people who have less knowledge about these issues. In particular, there is a clear cohesion between knowledge and the principle of mutual dependency. People with more knowledge have a better sense of mutual dependency in the world, what partially explains the initial positive effect of knowledge. Also gender, age and level of education all have a positive effect on the Global Citizenship Index. Women, Dutch citizens aged 35 years and older and the more highly educated more often exhibit behaviour related to global citizenship. The regression analyses show that this more frequent behaviour in the case of the more highly educated - and particularly women - can partially be explained by the fact that they support the three principles more often than the less well educated and men. Altruistic values, making contact with other cultures and the amount of social and institutional trust also show a positive cohesion with the extent to which people behave as global citizens. In particular, the importance attached to altruistic values has a strong positive effect on global citizenship. The higher the values, the more frequent the behaviour exhibited. These altruistic values also decrease the earlier observed effects of the three principles. It turns out that, in particular, the positive effect of the principle of equality on global citizenship may partially be explained by the fact that people who support this principle also attach greater importance to altruistic values. When all these background characteristics, including the combined three principles, are included in a model, some notable shifts occur. Earlier observed significant differences (such as those between men and women) disappear. More importantly, the coefficients of mutual dependency and shared responsibility are almost halved, and the effect of equality on global citizenship actually disappears entirely. Again, it appears that altruistic values play a very important role in the explanation of differences in the extent to which individuals behave as global citizens. As these values also closely relate to the adherence to the three principles, they thus explain a large part of the originally observed positive effect of the three principles on global citizenship in the basemodel. In spite of decreased cohesion, the principles of mutual dependency and shared responsibility continue to play a role in explaining the extent to which people behave as global citizens, even when a control is carried out jointly for these background characteristics. 49

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


chapter 6

ATTITUDE WITH REGARD TO DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION Until 2011 NCDO annually issued the Barometer International Cooperation. This barometer focused on the Dutch and (support) for development cooperation. For the sake of continuity, it has been decided to report the results of the two central questions from the Barometer International Cooperation in this report as well. These questions are about the importance of development cooperation in general and about the support for the government budget for development cooperation.

6.1. The Importance of Development Cooperation

How much importance do the Dutch attach to helping people in poor countries to develop themselves? The majority of the Dutch (64%) still consider this important in 2012. The extent of this support corresponds with the results from the previous editions of the Barometer International Cooperation. The recognition of the importance of development cooperation has remained more or less stable amongst the Dutch population since the measurement in 2009. Table 6.1 Importance of helping people in poor countries to develop themselves (2009 - 2012)

2009 (n=2079)

2010 (n=1500)

2011 (n=1544)

2012 (n=2250)

7%

9%

8%

7%

neutral

23%

27%

25%

26%

(very) important

68%

62%

64%

64%

3%

2%

3%

3%

(very) unimportant

dont know / no opinion

50

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


In 2010 there seemed to be a decline in the importance the Dutch attached to development cooperation, but this trend has not continued. In 2011, the percentage that considered it (very) important to help people in poor countries to develop themselves increased again to 64%. In 2012, this percentage remains invariably high. 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2009

2010 (very) important

2011

2012

(very) unimportant

Figure 6.1 Importance of helping people in poor countries to develop themselves (2009 - 2012)

The highly educated Dutch attach more importance to helping people from poor countries to develop than those with a secondary or lower education. The Dutch residing in the Randstad also attach more importance to this than those residing outside the Randstad. The Dutch who attach a greater importance to altruistic values also consider it more important to help people from poor countries with their development. This also applies to the Dutch who have more frequent contact with other cultures and those who have more institutional trust.

51

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


The Dutch voting for GroenLinks, the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) and D66 find it relatively important to help people in poor countries. Of all the Dutch, those voting for PVV find helping people in poor countries by far the least important.

6.2. The Dutch and the Budget for Development Cooperation

In recent years, the government has significantly cut back on development cooperation. In 2011, the budget was reduced from 0.8% of the GDP to 0.75% of the GDP (4.6 billion euros) and in 2012 this is further reduced to 0.7% of the GDP (Central Government 2010; Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2011). The question is whether the Dutch population supports these government cuts. The government cuts seem to be consistent with the views of the Dutch population. Almost half of the Dutch (48%) are of the opinion that the government budget for development cooperation should actually be reduced. And this in spite of the cuts already made in the past years. It should be noted that a previous NCDO research showed that only one third of the Dutch population are aware of the fact that in the past two years considerable cuts have been made (Carabain, Spitz & Hogeling, 2012). There is also always an equally large group that believes that the budget should remain unchanged or should be increased. Table 6.2 Do you think that the government budget for development cooperation should be increased, left unchanged or reduced? (2006-2012)

2006 (n=1512)

2007 (n=1487)

2008 (n=2525)

2009 (n=2079)

2010 (n=1500)

2011 (n=1544)

2012 (n=2250)

Increase

17%

13%

13%

10%

7%

10%

4%

Unchanged

46%

53%

51%

56%

48%

48%

44%

Reduction

37%

34%

36%

34%

45%

42%

48%

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know

5%

Since 2006, NCDO has asked the Dutch to what extent they are of the opinion that the budget for development cooperation should be increased, remain unchanged or be reduced.

52

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


The support among the Dutch to increase the budget for development cooperation has decreased in recent years. In 2012, the percentage who consider that the budget for development cooperation should be reduced is for the first time larger than the percentage of the Dutch who think that the budget should remain unchanged. Furthermore, in recent years, there has also been a decrease in the number of Dutch citizens who think that the budget for development cooperation should be increased. This year marks the provisional low point of this trend. Where in 2006 there were still 17% who supported the increase of the budget, this is only 4% in 2012. This means that there is permanent support for the government budget, but that this support is under pressure. 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 2006

2007

2008 increase

2009

2010

unchanged

decrease

2011

2012

Figure 6.2 Support for the budget for development cooperation (2006-2012)

The results of the year 2012 show that Dutch men and Dutch people with a lower education more often want the budget for development cooperation to be reduced. In contrast, women, Dutch citizens who attach a greater importance to altruistic values and those with a college degree or higher are more often opposed to the cuts on development cooperation. Also, the Dutch who have more frequent 53

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


contact with other cultures and those who have more social trust are often more opposed to these cuts. People who have themselves donated money to charitable organisations in the field of international aid are also more often opposed tot government cuts on development cooperation. The level of the income has no effect on either supporting or not supporting cuts on development cooperation. Relatively speaking, the Dutch who vote for GroenLinks and those who vote for the small Christian parties (Christen Unie and SGP) support cuts to development cooperation the least. The Dutch who vote for PVV are relatively speaking the most often in favour of a reduction of the budget for development cooperation. Further analyses show that over a third (38%) of the people who say that they find helping poor countries (very) important, nevertheless also think that the government budget should be reduced.

6.3. Conclusion

The importance attached by the Dutch to development cooperation remains undiminished in 2012. The large majority of the Dutch population (64%) consider it (very) important to help poor countries develop themselves. In spite of this support, in 2012 almost half of the Dutch (48%) believe that the government budget for development cooperation should be reduced. In contrast, an equally large group believes that the budget should remain unchanged or should be increased. This means that there is permanent support for the government budget, but this support is under pressure. Unlike previous years, this study did not ask the reason why people are of the opinion that the government budget should be reduced. The Barometer International Cooperation 2011 showed that the main reason for wanting to reduce the government budget was that the Dutch think that their own economy should be put in order first. In view of the continued recession it might well be that this argument now also plays a major role in the motivation for wanting to reduce the budget. It is also remarkable that the extent of support for the size of the government budget is not inversely proportionate to the actual amount that the government 54

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


spends on development cooperation. In 2006 - when still 0.8% of GDP was spent on development cooperation - 17% were of the opinion that this budget should be increased. Now, in 2012, and after a recent 12.5% reduction in the budget, only 4% still think that this budget should be increased. It should be noted that previous NCDO research showed that only one third of the Dutch are aware of the fact that, in the past two years, substantial cuts have been made and that they furthermore strongly overestimate the size of the government budget. The highest level of support for development cooperation - both in subscribing to the importance of helping poor countries and in the wish to increase the government budget - can be found under the highly educated and those with higher altruistic values. A greater amount of trust also results in a greater amount of support. Those who vote for GroenLinks and the small Christian parties are the biggest supporters of development cooperation.

55

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


references • C  arabain, C.L., Keulemans, S., Van Gent, M. (2012). Mondiaal Burgerschap. Amsterdam: NCDO. • Carabain, C.L., Spitz, G., Hogeling, L. (2012). Nederlanders en Overheidsbudget Ontwikkelingssamenwerking. Amsterdam: NCDO. • Carabain, C.L., Spitz, G., Keulemans, S. (2012). Nederlanders & Afval. Jonge en oudere Nederlanders over afval. Amsterdam: NCDO. • De Goede, I., Ruben, R. (2012). Nederlanders & Fair Trade 2011. Amsterdam: NCDO. • DGIS (Directoraat-generaal Internationale Samenwerking) (2009). Investeren in mondiaal burgerschap (Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, vergaderjaar 2008-2009, 31 250, nr. 58). Geraadpleegd via: http://ikregeer. nl/documenten/kst-31250-58. • Gilding, P. (2012). Helden uit noodzaak. Hoe onze generatie dankzij de ecologische en economische crisis de wereld gaat redden. Haarlem: Maurits Groen-MGMC. • Hento, I. (2011). Barometer Internationale Samenwerking. Amsterdam: NCDO. • International Energy Agency (2011). World Energy Outlook. Parijs: IEA Publications. • Kaiser, F.G., Wilson, M. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: the specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1531-1544. • Kaiser, F.G., Doka, G., Hofstetter, P., Ranney, M.A., (2003) Environmental behavior and its environmental consequences: a life cycle assessment of a self-report measure. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 11–20. • Kiesraad (2011). Kerngegevens Tweede Kamerverkiezing 2010. Geraadpleegd via: http://kiesraad.nl/sites/default/files/Kerngegevens_ Tweede_Kamer_2010_1.pdf. • Lehman Schlozman, K., Verba, S., Brady, H. (1999). Civic Participation and the Equal¬ity Problem. In Civic Engagement in American Democracy. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds. Washington: Brookings Institution Press. • Mattar, H. (2012). Public Policies on More-Sustainable Consumption. 2012 State of The World Report. Washington: Worldwatch Institute. 56

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


• M  azzola, U. (1890). I Dati Scientifici Della Finanza Pubblica. Whitefish, Montana, Verenigde Staten: Kessinger Publishing LLC. • Muskens, R. (2012). Energie. Amsterdam: NCDO. • NCDO (2012). De feiten op een rij: duurzaam consumeren. Amsterdam: NCDO. • OECD (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development) (2012). Environmental Outlook 2050. Parijs: OECD. Geraadpleegd via: http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/display.asp?K=5KG8332XNHD4&lang= EN&sort=sort_date%2Fd&stem=true&sf1=Title&st1=Environmental+Outloo k+2050&sf3=SubjectCode&sp1=not&st4=E4+or+E5+or+P5&sf4=SubVersion Code&ds=Environmental+Outlook+2050%3B+All+Subjects%3B+&m=1&dc= 2&plang=en • Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6 (1), 65–78. • Replogle, M., Hughes, C. (2012). Moving Toward Sustainable Transport. 2012 State of The World Report. Washington: Worldwatch Institute. • Rijksoverheid. Financiering Ontwikkelingssamenwerking. Geraadpleegd via: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/ontwikkelingssamenwerking/ financiering-ontwikkelingssamenwerking. • Rijksoverheid (2012). Kabinetsreactie WRR-rapport Minder pretentie, meer ambitie. Geraadpleegd via: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-enpublicaties/kamerstukken/2011/01/21/kabinetsreactie-wrr-rapport-minderpretentie-meer-ambitie.html. • Schuyt, Th.N.M., Gouwenberg, B.M., Bekkers, R.H.F.P. (2011). Geven in Nederland 2011. Giften, Nalatenschappen, Sponsoring en Vrijwilligerswerk. Amsterdam: Reed Business bv. • Spitz, G. (2012). Water. Bron van ontwikkeling, macht en conflict. Amsterdam: NCDO. • Steinfeld, H. G., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., De Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s Long Shadow – Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: FAO. • Stichting Actief Burgerschap (z.j.). Geraadpleegd via: http://www.actiefburgerschap.nl/index.php?hact=3&sact=3. • Strasser, S. (1999). Waste and Want: A social history of trash. New York: Metropolitan Books. • World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. • WRR (Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid) (2010). Minder pretentie, meer ambitie: ontwikkelingshulp die verschil maakt. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 57

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


methodology Data Collection

TNS NIPO was commissioned by the NCDO to carry out the Barometer Global Citizenship 2012. It is a representative study carried out amongst Dutch people of 18 years and older.

Sampling

The research was conducted within the online panel of TNS NIPObase. The TNS NIPObase is a database of 59,000 households (133,000 respondents) who regularly participate in research by TNS NIPO. The panel is representative for the Dutch and certified according to the ISO standards (ISO 20252 and ISO 26362). For the research among Dutch adults (18 years and older) 3,000 respondents were invited to participate. Because the response rate amongst younger Dutch citizens is lower, an excessive number of respondents in this group were initially approached. In table 7.1 you will find the response and distribution of the sampling per age category.

58

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Table 7.1 Sampling

Age

Ideal

Response

Sample

70+

12,80%

82%

10,11%

65-69

5,99%

82%

4,73%

60-64

8,29%

81%

6,71%

55-59

8,36%

78%

7,29%

50-54

9,06%

76%

8,33%

45-49

9,92%

73%

9,88%

40-44

10,03%

71%

10,56%

35-39

9,13%

68%

10,48%

30-34

7,72%

67%

9,13%

25-29

7,73%

68%

8,87%

20-24

7,81%

66%

9,52%

18-19

3,18%

62%

4,39%

100,00%

Response

100,00%

The data for this study was collected online. The fieldwork took place from Tuesday 19 June 2012 up to and including Sunday 1 July 2012. The respondents needed on average 17 minutes to complete the questionnaire. TNS NIPO sent two reminders to the people who had not responded to the invitation to participate in order to persuade them to participate in the study. At the end of the questionnaire, respondents were asked whether they wished to participate in this study again next year. The willingness to do this was high, 96% of the respondents indicated that they were willing to participate in the study again next year.

59

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


Table 7.2 Response

Respondents Invited

3.000

Response

2.250 (75%)

Willingness

2.160 (96%)

Weighting Responsibility

The results of the study are re-weighted taking gender, age, region, education and family size into account in order to achieve a representative sample for the Dutch population. The ideal figures are based on data from the Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The database includes the voting behaviour of the respondents in the parliamentary elections in 2010. This variable was added later and no account was taken of it in the sampling at the time of distribution. This resulted in the fact that the non-voters in the sample are under-represented (people who do not vote also tend to be less inclined to participate in a panel) and that the voting behaviour of a number of respondents is unknown (at the time they were not yet a member of the panel, or they did not answer the question about their voting behaviour). For the (weighted) descriptive statistics in this study, use was made of the weighting factor that includes voting behaviour. Table 7.3 Sampling efficiency 9

Sampling efficiency Adults (weigth excluding voting behaviour)

0,97

Adults (weight including voting behaviour)

0,67

Full research methodology can be found on the website of NCDO (www.ncdo.nl).

9

60

Sampling efficiency = unweighted n / (sum(weighing factors2))

NCDO research series GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP IN THE NETHERLANDS 2012


This report investigates the extent to which Dutch citizens aged 18 years and older behave as global citizens. The key element within the concept of global citizenship is the contribution made by individuals towards a liveable world. This encompasses not only support for international cooperation, but also the way in which peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s involvement in international issues defines their behaviour. Is the Dutch population aware of the mutual dependency in the world? Are they convinced of the equality of all human beings world-wide and do they feel a shared responsibility for global issues? What do Dutch people know of the world? And how does their everyday behaviour relate to these insights? These are the issues that this research evaluates. This publication is part of a series of research publications by NCDO. NCDO is the Dutch expertise and advisory centre for citizenship and international cooperation. NCDO carries out research, provides information and advice, stimulates public debate and is actively involved in the field of training and education.

This research publication was issued by NcDO, april 2013

Global citizenship 2012  

Do the Dutch behave as Global Citizens? NCDO research 2012.