Survey on Attitudes of Young Adults towards Global Development and Social Justice by IMVF

CHALLENGING

THE CRISIS

P ro mot ing Glo b a l J ust ice a n d Ci t i z ens ’ E ngage m e nt i n a T i me o f Uncerta i nt y

Spain

Portugal

Ireland

Slovenia

Greece

Italy

Survey on Attitudes of Young Adults towards � Global Development and Social Justice

challenging THE CRISIS

Co-ﬁnanced by

Implemented by

CHALLENGING THE CRISIS - PROMOTING CITIZENS’ ENGAGEMENT IN A TIME OF UNCERTAINTY IS A PROJECT CO-FINANCED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION. THE CONTENTS OF THIS PUBLICATION ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF IDEA AND ITS PROJECT PARTNERS AND CAN IN NO WAY BE TAKEN TO REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION.

Challenging the Crisis is a 3-year development education project led by the Irish Development Education Association (IDEA) with 6 partners: Fair Trade Hellas (Greece), CIPSI ‘Coordinamento di Iniziative Popolari di Solidarietà Internazionale’ (Italy), Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica (Italy), Instituto Marquês de Valle Flôr (Portugal), SLOGA (Slovenia) and Fundación Economistas sin Fronteras (Spain). The European Commission is the main funder. Website: www.challengingthecrisis.com Facebook: www.facebook.com/challengingthecrisis Twitter: @CtCrisis First published in 2015 by: © IDEA Research by: Associazione CReA (Italy) Analysis by: Melíosa Bracken (Ireland) With contributions from: Amárach Research (Ireland) Eamonn Casey (Ireland) Sergio Aguado Divar (Spain) Andreyna Caires (Portugal) Konstantinos Ioannidis (Greece) Marjan Huč and Polona Subotič (Slovenia) Associazione CReA (Italy) Designed by: PixelApes / www.pixelapes.com Edited by: IDEA staff and Karen Murphy Proof-read by: Rachel Mahon

Challenging the Crisis Partners gratefully acknowledge funding support from the following organisations in the production of this resource: the European Commission (all countries), Concern, Irish Aid and Trócaire (Ireland), Cooperación Española and Fundación Economistas sin Fronteras (Spain), Instituto Marquês de Valle Flôr and Camões – Instituto da Cooperação e da Língua (Portugal), Fair Trade Hellas (Greece), Mednarodno Razvojno Sodelovanje Slovenije / Slovenia’s development cooperation and SLOGA - Slovenian Global Action (Slovenia), Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica (Italy) and Coordinamento di Iniziative Popolari di Solidarietà Internazionale (Italy). The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of our donors.

CONTENTS 01

Introduction

Executive Summary

Background to the Study

Methodology

ProďŹ le of Survey Respondents

Understanding of International Development Issues

Attitudes towards Tackling Poverty and Inequality

Taking Action for Change

Conclusions

Bibliography

Annex 1: Questionnaire on Global Development and Social Justice

Annex 2: List of Acronyms

INTRODUCTION

“

Young people should be at the forefront of global change and innovation. Empowered, they can be key agents for development and peace. If, however, they are left on society’s margins, all of us

opportunity to participate fully in the lives of their societies.

“

will be impoverished. Let us ensure that all young people have every

Kofi Annan, Seventh Secretary - General of the United Nations

The EU member states have been badly affected by the 2008 economic crisis, with some countries finding it particularly challenging to respond and recover. In times of austerity it is easy to focus on the crisis at home and not consider wider global issues. To investigate whether this is the case among young people in the most indebted EU countries, the Irish Development Education Association (IDEA), together with partner organisations: IMVF, ESF, FTH, CIPSI, SLOGA and FCRE (the ‘partners’)1 conducted research to assess their level of engagement with issues of global citizenship and global justice. This report is part of the EU funded Development Education2 project ‘Challenging the Crisis – Promoting Global Justice and Citizens’ Engagement in a Time of Uncertainty’.3 The project aims to engage young people aged 16-30 from the European countries most affected by the financial crisis – Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain and Slovenia - to understand the interdependencies between local and global inequality. Its focus is on enabling them to become active advocates of global justice 1 See list of acronyms in annex 2 2 Development Education and Awareness Raising (DEAR) aims to inform EU citizens about development issues, mobilise greater public support for action against poverty, give citizens tools to engage critically with global development issues, to foster new ideas and change attitudes. – www.ec.europa.eu/ europeaid/sectors/human-rights-and-governance/development-education-and-awareness-raising_en 3 The project operates primarily through its youth-led network of advocates for change (Young Global Advocates (YGAs)) supported by the project partners. It also utilises campaigning activities integrating Development Education and Awareness Raising (DEAR) methodologies, with the aim of re-engaging and empowering European citizens to become agents of change. 4

issues and on strengthening support for international development amongst young people despite austerity measures at home. The purpose of this research is to determine current attitudes towards and engagement with global development and social justice issues among this group of young people, in order to identify ways of linking the austerity being experienced in their countries with issues related to international development. Charting what they think about global justice, how they understand related concepts and what their opinions are regarding key players will better enable their engagement in campaigns related to these issues. The findings inform the Challenging the Crisis campaign and will underpin the further development of young people from the focus countries as active advocates for international development and global justice. The ultimate goal of the project is to support the development of critical awareness of international development and global justice issues among young EU citizens; and strengthen their capacity to view the European debt crisis in a global and interdependent context. This will help ensure that possible solutions have a distinctly global dimension with a focus on active citizenship within the context of the European Year for Development in 2015, the end of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the setting of the agenda for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report outlines the views of young people, aged 15 – 34 from Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain and Slovenia, on international development, and their understanding of related concepts and issues. The aim of the survey is to assess whether global solidarity and development aid are priorities for European youth in a time of economic and political crisis and high unemployment. The key findings of the report are as follows:

The Actors • Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and Non-Governmental Development Organisations (NGDOs) are the most well known structures/institutions related to social justice and global development. ᴑᴑ 78% of respondents are familiar with NGOs or NGDOs ᴑᴑ 73% are familiar with European Financial institutions and 75% are familiar with International Financial Institutions. • NGOs and grass-root level social movements are considered to be the most effective actors in tackling social injustice, while governments in the respondents’ countries, the World Bank and IMF are judged to be the least effective. ᴑᴑ NGOs and NGDOs are believed to be the most effective at 82%, followed by individuals at 72%, the United Nations at 66%. ᴑᴑ 71% view their governments as ineffective, 41% view Trade Unions as ineffective, and 35% view religious institutions as ineffective. ᴑᴑ Only 25% consider the IMF effective, 30% the World Bank, while 55% view the EU as effective.

Concepts and Structures • Young people’s familiarity with the concepts and structures associated with social justice and

international development is strong overall with some notable findings. ᴑᴑ The most well-known development-related concepts are Public/National Debt (87%) and Social Justice (86%), which may be a reflection of their experiences of austerity nationally. ᴑᴑ After 15 years of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 52% are familiar with them. ᴑᴑ Similarly, 48% are familiar with the 0.7% Aid Goal.4

Poverty, Inequality and Injustice : Causes and Responsibility • Overall young people have clear opinions on what they consider to be the main causes of

poverty locally and globally. ᴑᴑ Corruption and Bad Governance is considered the main cause of poverty both locally and globally suggesting a significant lack of faith in the institutions of governance across the board. ᴑᴑ The second and third highest causes of poverty globally are exploitation by wealthier countries, and war and conflict. ᴑᴑ The second and third highest causes of poverty locally are social inequalities and debt repayments, possibly relating to the lived experience of the young people responding. • They also have clear opinions on whose responsibility it is to act against poverty.

ᴑᴑ Governments of rich countries and international institutions are believed to be the most responsible at 39% each. ᴑᴑ These are followed by governments of impoverished countries at 36% and individuals at 25%. ᴑᴑ NGOs, while considered the most effective actors, are believed to have most responsibility by only 17% of respondents.

4 0.7 refers to the commitment of the world’s governments to commit 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) to Official Development Assistance. For more see http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/press/07. htm 7

Distribution of Wealth and Development Aid • Young people have a strong sense of social justice and equality regarding the division and distribution of wealth globally and the responsibility for this. ᴑᴑ 89% agree that the division of wealth between the Global North and South is unacceptable. ᴑᴑ 68% disagree completely that the poorest countries should solve their own problems without help from the richest countries. ᴑᴑ 55% disagree completely that as long as people in their country live in poverty, we should not spend money on development aid. • The highest level of support is for an increase in allocation of funds to development aid.

ᴑᴑ Overall, half believe that development aid should increase. 20% think it should remain the same, while only 8% believe that it should decrease. In relation to this it is important to note the lack of awareness among 52% of the 0.7% Aid Goal. ᴑᴑ Almost a quarter have no opinion, suggesting that there is either confusion around this issue or that people may not be aware of the level of spending on development aid by their government. ᴑᴑ Only 28% completely disagree with the belief that “development aid is undermining rather than supporting attempts to get out of poverty,” while only 12% completely agree with the statement, suggesting that perhaps respondents see aid as one of a number of important steps that can be taken to alleviate issues such as poverty and inequality.

Creating Change • 95% of young people want to bring about positive change in support of global justice. They

believe that working with others is the most effective way of influencing what is happening around them both locally and globally. This sense that they can have an impact drops significantly when they move from considering their own local sphere of influence to the international level. ᴑᴑ 79% feel some level of helplessness regarding their ability to bring about change. ᴑᴑ However, overall a high percentage believe they can influence what happens around them: 92% believe that they have an influence at local level when working with others. ᴑᴑ 95% agree that “we need to look for collective action as well as individual action to make change happen.”

Active Engagement • The issues young people are most likely to support a campaign about are Social Inequality,

Human Rights, Unemployment and Access to Education. • Overall youth engagement in civil society activities is quite low. 26% are involved with NGOs,

13% in social movements, 17% in youth organisations and 10% in student organisations. • However, while they may not have regular engagement with established civil society

organisations they are still very engaged in certain types of action across the board. ᴑᴑ 81% make a donation in money or goods to a charity working in their country at least once per year, with only 13% having never done this. ᴑᴑ 67% have donated money or goods to overseas aid, with just over one in four never having done this. ᴑᴑ 24% have volunteered overseas and 19% are planning to in the future. ᴑᴑ Only 33% have never taken part in a campaign and 47% have never taken part in a global education course or program.

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

The survey was targeted at young people with an interest in global justice issues in Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Spain and Slovenia and designed to determine their attitudes towards and engagement with global development and social justice issues. The sample was targeted in this way so that the findings can be used to enable more successful engagement and campaigning on these issues.

Context The latest Eurobarometer survey5 on the attitudes of EU citizens towards development cooperation and aid shows that: • Support for development cooperation has increased overall since the height of the economic

crisis. This contrasts with the figures in 20116 which showed a significant decrease in support, particularly in countries most severely affected by the sovereign debt crisis in Europe. • In spite of continuing economic uncertainty across the EU, there is again strong support for

increasing development aid in almost all member states, even in those where the economic crisis has hit particularly hard, such as Spain and Greece. • While countries such as Italy, Ireland, Spain, Greece, Portugal and Slovenia had seen particularly

significant decreases in numbers of people who see aid as ‘very important’ in 2011, this trend has reversed with increases of between 1% in Italy and 15% in Ireland. One of the main causes of the decrease in support for development cooperation at the height of the economic crisis was the lack of employment, especially for young people. This continues to be an issue. Unemployment rates among young people in the EU reached an average of 23.4% in 2013 and

5 Special Eurobarometer 421, The European Year for Development – Citizen’s Views on Development, Cooperation and Aid, http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_421_en.pdf 6 Special Eurobarometer 375 of 2011. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_375_en.pdf 10

over 55% in Greece and Spain7. This has not changed significantly with the latest figures showing the average youth unemployment rate in February 2015 at 21.1 %.8 Another significant issue affecting young people in Europe is poverty and social exclusion, which was experienced by 29.7% of Europe’s young men and women in 2012.9 The European Anti Poverty Network (EAPN) has argued that the focus on ‘employment-only’ approaches to an economic recovery will not adequately cater for the diversity of issues affecting young people, and will result in a lost generation. The overall objective needs to be inclusion of youth, with employment as a key element, but not the only focus.10 Within this context, the Challenging the Crisis project is a platform for young people to mobilise in solidarity with each other and with other people experiencing poverty and inequality around the world.

7 EAPN 2014, Youth Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe - Issues, causes, and what can be done at EU and national levels. Position paper: http://www.eapn.eu/images/stories/docs/EAPN-position-papers-andreports/2014-EAPN-youth-poverty-position-paper.pdf 8 Eurostat Unemployment Statistics - http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/ Unemployment_statistics 9 EU-28, Eurostat, 2012 in European social statistics Pocketbooks, 2013 edition: http://ec.europa.eu/ eurostat/documents/3930297/5968986/KS-FP-13-001-EN.PDF 10 EAPN 2014, Youth Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe - Issues, causes, and what can be done at EU and national levels. Position paper: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3930297/5968986/KS-FP13-001-EN.PDF 11

METHODOLOGY

The survey was disseminated online by the project partners and the final useable participant sample consisted of 2033 young adults ranging in age from 15 to 34 and resident in the six project countries. The initial sample comprised a much larger number of responses (approx. 3200). However, a significant portion was deemed ineligible for inclusion, mainly due to the respondent leaving the survey before completing any substantive questions (i.e. only providing demographic information). Respondents who were aged over 35 years of age and/or were resident in a non-partner country were also deemed ineligible. These response sets (1255 in total) were removed from the sample to ensure results were as valid and accurate as possible.11 Each survey was carried out in a different language - English (Ireland), Spanish, Italian, etc. and the samples were aggregated according to the survey’s language and country of origin. At the beginning of the data collection stage, project partners disseminated the survey among their networks at local and national level. Invitations to participate in the survey were initially targeted at young people who were already active in youth organisations and social movements. This sampling strategy, known as purposive sampling, is useful when trying to reach a targeted sample as efficiently as possible and when a proportionately representative sample is not a primary concern. To mitigate the risk of sampling bias that can occur through the sole use of networks of peers whose members are likely to be similar in variables such as educational background or class, the next stage of data collection involved random sampling of the general population. This was achieved by inviting young people to participate through advertisements on radio, websites and print media or using private marketing research companies to disseminate the survey. It is important to note that the final sample is not nationally or statistically representative of the general youth populations in each of the partner countries. However, it does contain a broad cross section of young people with a 11 Early breakoffs on self-administered, web-based surveys are increasingly perceived as a ‘major shortcoming’ (Joss Roßmann, Jan Eric Blumenstiel, and Markus Steinbrecher (2014) Why Do Respondents Break Off Web Surveys and Does It Matter? Results From Four Follow-up Surveys. International Journal of Public Opinion Research first published online September 9, 2014 doi:10.1093/ ijpor/edu025). Factors contributing to high break-off rates include respondents’ inability to retrieve information needed and/or a reluctance to expose a perceived lack of knowledge. (Andy Peytchev. (2009) Survey Breakoff. International Journal of Public Opinion Quarterly, first published online April 2, 2009) 12

range of diverse experiences. Surveys were administered electronically using Survey Monkey and collected data was imported into Excel for univariate and bivariate analysis. It is also important to note the online nature of the survey as it omits the views of those without easy access to ICT and those with low literacy levels. Each data set was analysed individually and then responses were combined to create a set of overall statistics. The master version of the questionnaire was written in English. Translations and adaptations were made for five of the six countries involved.

PROFILE OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS

The demographic characteristics of the respondents to the survey include the following independent variables: sex, age, country of residence, level of education, area of residence (rural, urban, suburban) and employment status. The sample group comprised of 2033 respondents. Of that total 67.8% are female and 32% are male. 0.2% of the respondent group did not indicate their sex. Language

Respondents

% of the sample

Greece

202

10%

Ireland

480

24%

Italy

350

17%

Slovenia

251

12%

Spain

454

22%

Portugal

296

15%

Total

2033

100%

Table 1 Percentage of respondents in each country/language

The vast majority of respondents are between 15 and 30 years old, with just 4% falling into the 3134 year old category. Overall they have a very high level of education. Over half have degrees, 38% have a Bachelorâ€™s degree and 19% have a Postgraduate qualification, while 43% said they were full-time students. Of the rest, one in four have completed secondary school, 16% have completed vocational studies, and only 3% have just completed primary education or have no formal education. This could be a reflection of the fact that the survey was only available to those with online access. The unemployment rate of those who took part across the countries is very high, averaging at 17% overall â€“ the highest level was 32% in Italy and the lowest was in 6 % in Portugal. The number of full-time employed is also very low at just 21%, while the number of trainee/intern/volunteers is 7%. 14

Considering that 77% of those surveyed were between the ages of 21 and 34, together with their high level of education, these are significant figures, reflecting the challenges experienced by the respondents in accessing the labour market.

UNDERSTANDING OF INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

One of the key aims of this research was to gauge young peopleâ€™s understanding of international development and global justice. To gain a fuller picture, participants were asked where they received their information about these issues, which related concepts and structures they were familiar with, the reasons for the existence of poverty globally and locally and their level of empathy towards global poverty.

Where do they find their information? TV

General newspapers / magazines Internet (digital magazines, newspapers, blog) Newsletter or communication from solidarity/charity organisations / NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations) University bulletins

Social Networks

Other

Percentage (%)

Most used

Table 2: Sources of information on global development and social justice issues (Question 8)

The vast majority of young people access their information about international development issues mostly online - 78% via the internet and 33% via social networks. While this could be influenced by the fact that the survey was accessed online, indicating that respondents are internet users, the high figures are still significant and suggest that the online space is important to young people as a channel for sharing and accessing information. It also suggests that it is important to leverage this channel to successfully reach, communicate with and educate young people about development issues. 16

How familiar are they with related concepts and structures?

Fairtrade International Financial Institutions (World Bank, IMF) Millennium Development Goals Bilateral Cooperation Microcredit Tobin Tax Emerging Countries 0.7% Aid Goal NGDOs or NGOs (Non-Governmental (Development) Organisations) Responsible Consumption Social Economy Public/National Debt Social Justice Global Development European Financial Institutions (European Investment Bank , European Central Bank)

Table 3: Familiarity with concepts and structures related to social justice and global development (Question 9)

Respondentsâ€™ familiarity with the concepts and structures associated with social justice and international development is strong overall. The most well-known development related concepts among young people are (the oneâ€™s they are very or a bit familiar with) Public/National Debt, 87%, and Social Justice, 86%, most likely reflecting their own experiences of austerity. Unsurprisingly, they are least familiar with technical terms such as Tobin Tax, Micro Credit and Bilateral Cooperation. Significantly, almost half, 48%, are not familiar with the Millennium Development Goals, suggesting that there has been a lack or breakdown in communication which needs to be addressed to ensure greater awareness and support among young people for the Sustainable Development Goals. Also significant is the finding that just over half, 52%, are not familiar with the 0.7% Aid Goal, a commitment of the worldâ€™s governments to commit 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) to Official Development Assistance. While only one in four are not familiar with European Financial Institutions or International Financial Institutions, this finding is interesting as it suggests that as many as 25% are unaware of the role these institutions are playing in the economic lives of their countries.

Most familiar Concept

Respondents

Least familiar

Respondents

Fairtrade

Irish

Spanish

International Financial Institutions (World Bank, IMF)

Portuguese

Italian

Millennium Development Goals

Portuguese

Irish

Bilateral Cooperation

Portuguese

Spanish

Microcredit

Portuguese

Irish

Tobin Tax

Spanish

Slovenian

Emerging Countries

Greek

Irish

0.7% Aid Goal

Spanish

Slovenian

NGDOs or NGOs (NonGovernmental (Development) Organisations)

Slovenian

Italian

Responsible Consumption

Greek

Irish

Social Economy

Portuguese

Irish

Public/National Debt

Portuguese

Irish

Social Justice

Greek

Irish

Global Development

Portuguese

Irish

Most familiar Concept

European Financial Institutions (European Investment Bank, European Central Bank)

Least familiar

Respondents

Portuguese

Irish

Table 4 : Familiarity with concepts and structures related to social justice and global development according to sample (Question 9)

What is their level of empathy towards global poverty? To gauge their empathy towards global poverty, respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a series of statements, related to this issue. Development aid is undermining rather than supporting attempts to get out of poverty As long as people in my own country live in poverty, we should not spend money on development aid There is a strong link between development and migration The division in the world between the rich North and the poor South is unacceptable

I completely agree I partially agree I completely disagree I donâ€™t know / I have no opinion

The poorest countries should solve their own problems themselves without help from the richest countries The wealth in the North is based upon poverty and exploitation of impoverished countries

Percentage (%)

Table 5: Opinion in response to the listed statements (Question 11)

Overall young people demonstrated a strong level of empathy towards those living in the poorest countries globally - 89% agree that “the division in the world between the rich North and the poor South is unacceptable.” They also indicated a strong belief that the Global North has a responsibility and role to play in alleviating this. 80% agree that “The wealth in the North is based upon poverty and exploitation of impoverished countries”. A majority, 68%, completely disagree with the statement “The poorest countries should solve their own problems themselves without help from the richest countries” compared to just 3% that completely agree with it. 55% completely disagree that “as long as people in my own country live in poverty, we should not spend money on development aid”, compared to 8% who completely agree.

Table 6: Solidarity with the Global South: “Are you concerned about the fact that many people in the poorest countries are subject to poverty, inequality and injustice?” (Question 14)

Concern among young people for those living in poverty is very high, at 72% overall, with only 2% indicating that they ‘couldn’t be bothered’. Only 11% feel powerless about the concern they feel, while as little as 8% are aware of it but think that inequality and injustice in their own country is more important. At a national level all respondents expressed a high level of concern, particularly the Greek, Spanish and Portuguese respondents at 85%, 84% and 81% respectively. Irish respondents feel the highest level of powerlessness, at 15%, while Italian respondents expressed the most concern for affairs in their own country at 16%.

Why does poverty exist locally and globally? Overall there is consensus among the respondents regarding the main causes of global poverty. Corruption and bad governance Wars and conflicts InsufďŹ cient education Overpopulation Natural disasters Climate Change Wealthier counties taking advantage of poorer countries Debt repayments Trade policies Structural adjustment policies imposed by World Bank and IMF InefďŹ cient aid Social inequalities

Percentage (%)

Most important

Table 7: Top causes of poverty globally (Question 10)

Young people consider corruption and bad governance to be the main cause of poverty. The second and third highest causes of poverty globally are exploitation by wealthier countries, and war and conflict. All countries ranked corruption and bad governance as the top or second main cause of poverty globally - Greece, Italy, and Spain ranked it in second place behind exploitation by wealthier countries. The other causes globally that made the top three were war and conflict, in all countries except Greece and Spain, who both included social inequalities. Insufficient education made the top three in Ireland. Significantly, there is very low recognition across the countries of climate change as a poverty trigger globally.

The reasons poverty exists “at home” There is also a high level of consensus among respondents regarding the causes of poverty where they live. Respondents in all countries consider corruption and bad governance to be the main one. This is a significant finding given that it echoes their understanding of the reasons for poverty worldwide. It also suggests a significant lack of faith among young people in governments and international organisations. Regarding the main causes of poverty locally, Slovenia, Spain, Ireland and Portugal all listed social inequalities and debt repayments as the second and third main causes in that order. Italy also had social inequalities as the second main cause but chose insufficient education as the third, while Greece listed World Bank/IMF policy as the second main cause with debt repayments as the third. Interestingly, debt repayments ranked as a factor by 75% in local poverty in comparison to 50% who thought it was a factor in global poverty. Corruption and bad governance Wars and conflicts Insufﬁcient education Overpopulation Natural disasters Climate Change Wealthier counties taking advantage of poorer countries Debt repayments Trade policies Structural adjustment policies imposed by World Bank and IMF Inefﬁcient aid Social inequalities

Percentage (%)

Most important

Table 8: Top causes of poverty at home (Question 10)

ATTITUDES TOWARDS TACKLING POVERTY AND INEQUALITY

The research was also aimed at charting young peopleâ€™s attitudes towards how we tackle poverty and inequality globally and at home. The focus areas were government spending on global development and social justice, responsibility for acting against poverty, inequality and injustice, and the effectiveness of different actors in tackling inequality, poverty, and injustice.

Who are the most effective actors tackling inequality, poverty, and injustice? NGOs and NGDOs are believed to be the most effective at 82%, followed by individuals at 72% and the United Nations at 66%. The traditional pillars of society fared less well with 71% viewing governments as ineffective, 41% viewing Trade Unions as ineffective, and 35% viewing religious institutions as ineffective. Only 25% consider the IMF effective, 30%, the World Bank, while the EU fared better at 55%. These figures correspond with the belief among young people that two of the top three causes of poverty locally are bad governance and debt repayments.

Who is responsible for tackling poverty? The perceived underperformance by governing and financial institutions outlined above is reflected in the level of responsibility that the young people are assigning to them as actors against poverty. Governments of rich countries and international institutions are believed to be the most responsible at 39% each. These are followed by governments of impoverished countries at 36% and individuals at 25%. NGOs, considered the most effective actors against poverty, are believed by only 17% to have most responsibility. Only 16% assign responsibility to private business, which may suggest a potential lack of awareness of the role played by the private sector in the economies of all countries, 23

particularly those experiencing high levels of poverty.

NGOs / NDGOs

Private Sector / Businesses

Institutions such as the UN

Governments of enriched countries

Governments of impoverished countries

Individual citizens / people

Percentage (%)

Table 9: Responsibility to act against poverty, inequality and injustice (Question 15)

The findings across the countries are interesting with governments of impoverished countries allocated the highest responsibility to tackle poverty by Slovenian and Irish respondents at 47% and 35% respectively, ahead of governments of rich countries. This contrasts with the young people in Greece, Italy and Portugal who allocate top responsibility to international institutions at 48%, 49%, and 48% respectively, suggesting that a significant number of the 75% that are familiar with these institutions recognise them as key economic players. The only group at the national level to apportion most responsibility to governments of rich countries is Spain at 52%.

Government spending on global development and social justice The feedback on government spending on development aid was particularly interesting. Overall, half believe that it should increase. However, only 28% completely disagree with the belief that â€œdevelopment aid is undermining rather than supporting attempts to get out of poverty,â€? while only 12% completely agree with that statement. This may suggest that respondents see aid as only one of a number of important steps the Global North can take to alleviate issues such as poverty and inequality. 20% of respondents think it should remain the same, while only 8% believe that it should decrease. Again the fact that 52% are not familiar with the 0.7% Aid Goal may have a role to play in this. 24

Almost a quarter have no opinion, suggesting that there is either confusion around this issue or that people may not be aware of the level of spending by their government. 50

0 Increase

Stay the same

Decrease

No opinion

Table 10: Do you think the amount the government of your country spends on global development and social justice should: increase, decrease or stay the same? (Question 12)

A majority across five of the six countries believe that spending should increase, with the highest level of support in Spain at 73% followed by Slovenia at 55%. The only country that differed was Ireland, where 29% support an increase compared with 37% who believe it should stay the same. This could be due a high level of monetary and personal engagement by individuals in Ireland, see page 29, combined with a low level of familiarity, 33%, with the Irish Governmentâ€™s commitment to the 0.7% Aid Goal.

Spanish

Slovenian

Portuguese

Italian

Increase Stay the same Decrease I donâ€™t know

Greek

Irish

Percentage (%) Table 11: Opinions regarding changes in government aid spending by sample (Question 12)

TAKING ACTION FOR CHANGE

Respondents were asked how much they agreed with a series of statements regarding contributing to social change, locally and globally, while working with others and alone. I want to bring about positive change towards global justice I feel helpless in bringing about positive change towards global justice My day-to-day actions donâ€™t really effect people in the poorest countries of the world Individual actions can help to bring change but itâ€™s not enough We need to look for collective action as well as individual action to make change happen As an individual, I can influence what happens in my local community

I I I I

When working with others, I can influence what happens in my local community As an individual, I can influence what happens in my country When working with others, I can influence what happens in my country

completely agree partially agree completely disagree donâ€™t know / have no opinion

As an individual, I can influence what happens at international level When working with others, I can influence what happens at international level

Percentage (%)

Table 12: Personal commitment and motivation to bring about change in global development and social justice (Question 17)

Can individuals make a difference? There is a strong desire among 95% of young people to bring about positive change supporting global justice. While 73% feel some level of helplessness about bringing about change, overall a high percentage believe they can influence what happens around them. 92% believe that they can have an influence at local level, when working with others, while 44%, believe they can have an influence 27

as an individual on what happens at international level. They believe that working with others is the most effective way of influencing what is happening around them both locally and globally. This sense that they can have an effect drops significantly when they move from considering their own local sphere of influence to the international level. The majority believe that although individual actions are important, they are not enough. 95% agree that â€œwe need to look for collective action as well as individual action to make change happen.â€?

Youth engagement in civil society organisations Types of organisations

% of respondents

NGO or CSO

26%

Youth organisation

17%

Student association

10%

Debt network

Social movement

13%

Cultural or religious association or other

Table 13: Current engagement in movements and organisations (Question 18 and 19)

Overall youth engagement in civil society activities is low. 26% are involved with NGOs/CSOs, 13% in social movements, 17% in youth organisations and 10% in student organisations. However, while they may not have regular engagement with established civil society organisations they are still very engaged in certain types of action across the board. In terms of overall activism, 81% make a donation in money or goods to a charity working in their country at least once per year and only 13% have never done this. 67% have donated money or goods to overseas aid, with just over one in four never having done this. 24% have volunteered overseas and 19% are planning to in the future. Interestingly, only 33% have never taken part in a campaign and 47% have never taken part in a global education course or programme.

At least once a week

At least once a month

At least once a year

Donated money/ goods to overseas aid

19%

32%

Donated money/ goods to a charity working in your country

14%

29%

33%

Volunteered overseas

Volunteered in your country

16%

11%

13%

22%

Taken part in a campaign

13%

25%

Taken part in a global education course or programme

13%

Once

Sometimes

Table 14: Types of action taken and how often (Question 20)

Spain and Ireland have the highest levels of donation of money/goods both to a charity working in their countries at 90% and also for donations to overseas aid at 89% and 84%. Portugal has the highest level of volunteers in their country at 73% followed by Ireland at 71%. Portugal also has the highest number who have taken part in a campaign, 74%, followed by Spain, 66%, and Ireland, 63%. The figures for those who have taken part in a global education course or programme are lower, the highest number being in Spain at 54% followed by Greece and Slovenia, both at 41%. The issues these young people are most likely to support a campaign about are Social Inequality, Human Rights, Unemployment and Access to Education.

CONCLUSIONS

“

Young people will be the torch bearers of the next sustainable development agenda through 2030. We must ensure that this transition, while protecting the planet, leaves no one behind. We have a shared responsibility to embark on a path to inclusive and

rights and the rule of law are upheld.

“

shared prosperity in a peaceful and resilient world where human

Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary - General The findings of the Challenging the Crisis survey show that solidarity with those living in poorer countries continues to be very strong amongst young people from the EU countries most harshly affected by the financial crisis. The report also highlights the fact that Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and NonGovernmental Development Organisations (NGDOs) are the most well known structures or institutions related to social justice and global development. As they are also considered to be the most effective actors in tackling social injustice, there is an opportunity for those working in these organisations to use this trust to build relationships with more young people and provide them with opportunities to become more engaged and active on these issues. Awareness of institutions such as the World Bank and IMF is relatively high, though one in four are not familiar with them. These institutions, along with the governments of the respondents’ countries, are seen as being the least effective in tackling poverty, while being most responsible for acting against it. This indicates a lack of trust among young people in governing bodies both locally and globally. It also suggests that these institutions need to better communicate their work in this area. These young people’s familiarity with the concepts and structures associated with social justice and international development is strong, particularly with the concepts and structures related to their experiences of austerity. However, only 52% are in any way familiar with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Such a low level of awareness of the MDGs after 15 years indicates a need for a much more proactive approach to engaging and raising awareness among young people around the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Equally significant is the finding that just over 30

half, 52%, are not familiar with the 0.7% Aid Goal, suggesting that there needs to be more effective communication and awareness raising around this target to ensure governments are held to account and honour their commitment. Regarding the allocation of funds to development aid, the greatest support in each country, except Ireland, is for an increase by governments in the amount they spend on aid. There are possible reasons for this: Ireland performs comparatively well in this area, compared to the other countries surveyed in this report; the Irish respondents were second most active, after Spain, in terms of personal donations and volunteering; and the â€˜Irishâ€™ respondents also only had a 33% awareness of the 0.7% Aid Goal. Also significant is that support for an increase in aid spending is below 50% in two of the other five countries, and overall, there is a low level of complete disagreement with the statement that aid is undermining attempts to get out of poverty. This suggests that along with working to increase awareness of the 0.7% Aid Goal, there is a significant need to communicate and educate people about what development aid is, where it goes and how it helps. The large majority of respondents feel concern that many people in the poorest countries are subject to poverty, inequality and injustice. They also have a clear, shared understanding of the most influential causes of poverty globally. However, more needs to be done to raise young peopleâ€™s understanding of other major causes of poverty, particularly the role played by debt repayments, trade policies and economic policies, as well as the role played by climate change. They are also clear about whose responsibility it is to alleviate poverty. The governments of wealthy countries along with international institutions such as the UN, and the governments of impoverished countries, are believed, almost equally, to carry the largest responsibility in this instance. When you take into account how ineffective they are considered to be, there is an implicit onus on governments and international bodies such as the UN to work together to do more. It is clear that these young people are sympathetic to and feel solidarity with people in poorer countries, and have a strong desire to bring about change, as well as a realistic awareness that this can best happen through collaboration. They are aware that there needs to be collective action as well as individual action to make change happen. This suggests there is an opportunity for those working on these issues to provide guidance and opportunities to young people to engage actively on these issues. 2015 - the European Year for Development - marks the end of the MDGs and the beginning of the SDGs. It is a crucial time to engage with and educate the public, in particular young people, about development issues. UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon, has said that young people are the torch bearers of the SDGs. The findings of this report highlight the need to more actively engage with them, educate them, encourage them to think about the role that they have to play in international sustainable development, and provide them with opportunities to act.

9.1 Recommendations Based on the findings of this report, we, the project partners Fair Trade Hellas (Greece), CIPSI ‘Coordinamento di Iniziative Popolari di Solidarietà Internazionale’ (Italy), Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica (Italy), Instituto Marquês de Valle Flôr (Portugal), SLOGA (Slovenia), Fundación Economistas sin Fronteras (Spain) and the Irish Development Education Association (Ireland), make the following recommendations for CSOs and to our national governments and MEPs to maximise public engagement with issues related to global development and social justice:

Act • The opportunity to engage young people on the Sustainable Development Goals must not be

missed. These goals should not be seen as something that only concerns people in the socalled ‘developing world’. These goals have the potential to improve life in Europe and globally, especially during these austere times. The SDGs are intended to be ‘universal’ - as applicable in the Global North as they are in the Global South.

Educate • It is clear that there needs to be further engagement with young people in discussion, debate

and critical thinking about sustainable development. Development Education is a platform for engaging young people in thinking about global justice, and further provision of Development Education can meet the challenge of youth engagement in the Post-2015 agenda. We would advise governments, especially in Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain and Slovenia to finance and support Development Education. Increased education on the interdependency of social justice and economic equality would galvanise support and engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals.

Commit • Over half of the young people surveyed said that they were not familiar with the concept of

0.7% aid spending. With only four of the 2812 EU Member States managing to reach the target of 0.7% of GNP being spent on aid, this data is unsurprising, but disappointing. Again we would urge EU Governments to pledge to meet the 0.7% target. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agenda provides an opportunity for a renewed energy to meet this target which would send a clear message to the young people of Europe that their governments are committed to international development and global justice.

Raise awareness • We would ask NGOs and NGDOs working in this area to focus on increasing awareness of the 12 Four EU Member States exceeded the 0.7% ODA/GNI mark (Denmark, Luxembourg, Sweden, UK). Available at: European Commission - http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-388_en.htm 32

Post-2015 agenda to improve the chances of meeting the ambitious goals both in the Global South and Global North. The public we engage with must feel part of the agenda, in order to contribute to the solution to global inequality.

Communicate • The young people surveyed were most familiar with NGOs and NGDOs as structures related

to social justice and global development. Additionally, the young people deem NGOs to be the most effective actors in tackling inequality, poverty and injustice. With this in mind, we would encourage governments and the European Union to increase the visibility of their own support for development issues. International development is not a niche issue, which only concerns NGOs and NGDOs. It is an issue that requires visible work from all branches of society and government. Also, the role of all sectors in society which contribute to combating global poverty and inequality needs to be visible – e.g. business, religious institutions, international institutions, etc. The end of the MDGs and the start of the SDGs is a perfect opportunity for governments to increase visibility on development issues among young people.

Celebrate • We would recommend that governments and UN agencies communicate and celebrate the

successes of international development efforts on an ongoing basis.

Build • From our findings we have noted a strong sense of altruism and support for equality and social

justice among the young people that we surveyed. Despite austerity at a national level, the young people surveyed do not view Europe in a vacuum. We recommend that this support for social justice issues is something that NGOs, governments and EU policy makers need to focus on.

9.2 Challenging the Crisis in the UK explaining to people the facts and causes of poverty.

“

Take every penny you have set aside in aid for Tanzania, and spend it

Julius Nyerere, Former Tanzanian President Challenging the Crisis is a 3-year Development Education project led by IDEA with partners in 5 other countries. The European Commission is the main funder. The other partners in the project are: Fair Trade Hellas (Greece), CIPSI ‘Coordinamento di Iniziative Popolari di Solidarietà Internazionale’ 33

(Italy), Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica (Italy), Instituto Marquês de Valle Flôr (Portugal), SLOGA (Slovenia) and Fundación Economistas sin Fronteras (Spain). The project runs from April 2013 - April 2016. Through the Challenging the Crisis project, young adults from Greece, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain are engaged and enabled to understand the interdependencies of local and global inequality and become active advocates on global justice issues. It aims to create awareness of and support for international sustainable development policies, despite austerity measures at home. The project aims to contribute to a more just and sustainable world by raising awareness and empowering EU citizens as global development advocates. Specifically it aims to: • Influence policy at national and European level • Bring about change in the public engagement approach of development NGOs and CSOs • By bringing together young people, it is envisaged that a focus on global justice will show the

value of responding jointly to the current financial crisis and re-engage us with the idea of a European community acting in solidarity to overcome global challenges. The young people that are involved in this project are known as Young Global Advocates (YGAs). Through Development Education the YGAs are encouraged to think of ideas to tackle inequality at home and abroad – a reframing of development. Working together across the partner countries they were asked to come up with a solution to the issue of inequality across the world. After much debate the young people agreed that the way to “Challenge the Crisis” in Europe and the Global South was by creating cohesion through Social and Solidarity Economy. Social and Solidarity Economy has many diverse meanings, however its ultimate aim is to satisfy the needs of individuals and communities across the world. Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) includes traditional forms of cooperatives and mutual associations, fair trade organisations, associations of informal sector workers, social enterprises, and community currency and alternative finance schemes – such as micro finance groups or credit unions.13 Social and Solidarity Economy is globally applicable. It is as useful in Europe as it is in the Global South. In simple terms it puts people at the centre of the economy. It is based on the following core values: • Democracy • Solidarity 13 Based on information obtained from UNRSID - http://unsse.org/ and the UN Interagency Task Force on Social and Solidarity Economy - http://unsse.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Position-Paper_TFSSE_ Eng1.pdf 34

• Inclusiveness • Diversity • Sustainable Development • Equality, equity and justice for all

Through this project based on the core principles of Development Education, the YGAS wish to campaign for a truly transformative solution. Social and Solidarity Economy challenges the current socio-economic power structures, which they have witnessed as the root causes of poverty in their own societies and across the world. The Young Global Advocates are and will continue to campaign to promote SSE in two main ways: 1. Political Advocacy: meeting with European and national policy-makers and representatives (such

as MEPs) to seek their involvement and support for SSE. 2. Public awareness raising: running workshops for young people, community-based initiatives,

schools, universities, media as well as NGOs and CSOs to inform people about SSE as a more equitable response to the current financial crisis in Europe, and one which brings together local and global development agendas. To find out more and get involved, go to: Website: www.challengingthecrisis.com Facebook: www.facebook.com/challengingthecrisis Twitter: @CtCrisis

BIBLIOGRAPHY Amárach Research 2013, Attitudes towards Development Cooperation in Ireland. Report of a National Survey of Irish Adults http://www.dochas.ie/Shared/Files/2/131002-Amarach_survey-Key_ Finding.pdf DEAR in Europe 2010, Recommendations for Future Interventions by the European Commission Final Report of the ‘Study on the Experience and Actions of the Main European Actors Active in the Field of Development Education and Awareness Raising’. Consultants: Agnes Rajacic, Alessio Surian, Harm-Jan Fricke, Johannes Krause, Peter Davis, Soges SPA https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/fpfis/ mwikis/aidco/images/d/d4/Final_Report_DEAR_Study.pdf EAPN 2014, Youth Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe - Issues, causes, and what can be done at EU and national levels. Position paper: http://www.eapn.eu/images/stories/docs/EAPN-positionpapers-and-reports/2014-EAPN-youth-poverty-position-paper.pdf European Social Statistics Pocketbooks, 2013 edition http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ documents/3930297/5968986/KS-FP-13-001-EN.PDF Special Eurobarometer 375, Making a Difference in the World: Europeans and the Future of Development Aid. Conducted by TNS Opinion & Social at the request of Directorate-General Development and Cooperation – EuropeAid. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ ebs_375_en.pdf Special Eurobarometer 421, The European Year for Development – Citizens’ Views on Development, Cooperation and Aid – EuropeAid. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_421_en.pdf Eurostat Unemployment Statistics - http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/ Unemployment_statistics EU-28, Eurostat, 2012 in European social statistics Pocketbooks, 2013 edition: http://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/documents/3930297/5968986/KS-FP-13-001-EN.PDF/6952d836-7125-4ff5-a1536ab1778bd4da

ANNEXES ANNEX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ON GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL JUSTICE The Irish Development Education Association (IDEA) along with Partners IMVF, ESF, FTH, CIPSI, SLOGA and FCRE are undertaking a survey in the framework of a European youth project called Challenging the Crisis. An important part of this project is gathering the opinions of young people in your country and across Europe on global development and social justice issues. We would be very grateful if you would fill in the questionnaire below, which consists of four short sections. We are really interested to hear your opinion - as a young person - on global development and social justice issues. If you have no opinion on a particular question, there is an option to indicate this, or you can go to the next question without any problem. If you wish to remain in touch with the Challenging the Crisis project, please send an e-mail to IDEA (elaine@ideaonline.ie). Please note, all responses are confidential and will be used to inform future actions of the Challenging the Crisis project. The overall results from across Europe will be shared online.

Personal Details 1. Age 15-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27-30 Other

2. Sex Male Female Other

3. Country you live in Austria

Latvia

Belgium

Lithuania

Bulgaria

Luxembourg

Croatia

Malta

Cyprus

Netherlands

Czech Republic

Poland

Denmark

Portugal

Estonia

Romania

Finland

Slovakia

France

Slovenia

Germany

Spain

Greece

Sweden

Hungary

United Kingdom

Ireland

Other

Italy

4. Where do you live? Indicate the appropriate option: I live in an (a)â€Ś.environment Urban (city or town) Suburban Rural

5. What is the highest level of education you have reached? None Primary School Secondary School Vocational Studies Bachelor’s Degree (BA) Post-Graduate Studies Other

6. Are you ….. (it is possible to select more than one option): A full-time student A part-time student Employed full-time Employed part-time Unemployed Trainee or Intern Other

7. Are you ….(marital status) (it is possible to select more than one option): Single Cohabiting with partner or civil union Married Divorced Widowed Other

Knowledge /opinions about global issues and development 8. When looking for information related to global development and social justice, how often, if at all, do you use the following sources? Most used

A bit used

Less used

Never

TV General newspapers/ magazines Internet (digital magazines, newspapers, blogâ€Ś) Newsletter or communication from solidarity/charity organisations/NGOs (NonGovernmental Organisations) University bulletins Social networks Others

9. How would you rate your familiarity with the following concepts and structures related to social justice and global development? Very familiar with it

Fairtrade International financial institutions (World Bank, IMF) Millennium Development Goals Bilateral cooperation Microcredit Tobin Tax Emerging countries 40

A bit familiar with it

Not familiar with it

Very familiar with it

A bit familiar with it

Not familiar with it

0.7% goal NGDOs or NGOs (NonGovernmental (Development) Organisations) Responsible consumption Social Economy Public/National debt Social justice Global development European financial institutions (European Investment Bank, European Central Bankâ€Ś)

10. Please, rank, in order of importance the FIVE most important reasons why poverty exists globally and where you live. Please rank only your top five choices (1 = Most important, 5 = less important) for each: Firstly related to world poverty and secondly related to poverty where you live. Rating from 1 to 5

Rating from 1 to 5

(1 = most important, 5 = less important)

In the world

Where you live

Corruption and bad governance Wars and conflicts Insufficient education Overpopulation Natural disasters Climate Change Wealthier counties taking advantage of poorer countries 41

Rating from 1 to 5

(1 = most important, 5 = less important)

Debt repayments Trade policies Structural adjustment policies imposed by World Bank and IMF Inefficient aid Social inequalities

11. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements: I completely agree

I partially agree

Development aid is undermining rather than supporting attempts to get out of poverty As long as people in my own country live in poverty, we should not spend money on development aid There is strong link between development and migration The division in the world between the rich North and the poor South is unacceptable

I completely disagree

I donâ€™t know/I have no opinion

I completely agree

I partially agree

I completely disagree

I don’t know/I have no opinion

The poorest countries should solve their own problems themselves without help from the richest countries The wealth in the North is based upon poverty and exploitation of impoverished countries

Attitudes towards tackling poverty, global development and social justice 12. Do you think the amount the government of your country spends on global development and social justice should: Increase Stay the same Decrease I don’t know

13. In your opinion how effective are different actors in tackling inequality, poverty and injustice? Completely effective

Partially effective

United Nations Government of my country NGOs/ Civil Society Organisations

Ineffective

I don’t know/I have no opinion

Completely effective

Partially effective

Ineffective

I don’t know/I have no opinion

Private sector/ businesses Trade Unions Local Authorities Church and Missionaries Individual citizens/People European Union World Bank IMF

14. Are you concerned about the fact that many people in the poorest countries are subject to poverty, inequality and injustice? I’m worried about it I’m aware of it but I’m not worried I couldn’t be bothered I know about it but I can’t do anything about it I’m aware but poverty, inequality and injustice in my own country are more important

15. In your opinion, who has responsibility to act against poverty, inequality and injustice? Please rank your top three choices from 1 to 3 in order of responsibilities (1= Most responsible) Individual citizens/People Governments of impoverished countries Governments of enriched countries International institutions such as UN Private sector/businesses NGOs or NGDOs (Non-Governmental Development Organisations)

16. In your opinion, how important is it to have solidarity with people in poorer countries? Very important Fairly important Not very important Not at all important I donâ€™t know/have no opinion

Personal attitudes to change in global development and social justice 17. Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements: I completely agree

I partially agree

I want to bring about positive change towards global justice I feel helpless in bringing about positive change towards global justice My day-to-day actions donâ€™t really effect people in the poorest countries of the world Individual actions can help to bring change but itâ€™s not enough We need to look for collective action as well as individual action to make change happen As an individual, I can influence what happens in my local community When working with others, I can influence what happens in my local community As an individual, I can influence what happens in my country

I completely disagree

I donâ€™t know/I have no opinion

I completely agree

I partially agree

When working with others, I can influence what happens in my country As an individual, I can influence what happens at international level When working with others, I can influence what happens at international level

Taking action 18. Are you active in any organisation? Yes No

19. If so, what type of organisation? (It is possible to select more than one option): NGO or CSO (Non-Governmental Organisation or Civil Society organisation) Youth organisation Student association Debt network Social movement Other

I completely disagree

I donâ€™t know/I have no opinion

20. How regularly have you done any of following? At least once a week

At least once a month

At least once a year

Sometimes

once

Donated money/ goods to overseas aid Donated money/ goods to a charity working in your country Volunteered overseas Volunteered in your country Taken part in a campaign Taken part in a global education course or programme

Seldom

Iâ€™m planning to

Never

I donâ€™t know

21. If young people in Europe were going to create a campaign on a topic related to global development and social justice, which issues would you support a campaign about? Please rank your top 3 choices ( 1= Most likely to support) Womenâ€™s rights Climate Change Unemployment Human rights Childrenâ€™s rights Access to education Food sovereignty Social inequalities Migration Public/National Debt Other

22. Would you like to stay in touch with the Challenging the Crisis project? Yes No

If so please include your email address here:

Or alternatively send us an email at info@ideaonline.ie Thank you for your cooperation!

ANNEX 2: LIST OF ACRONYMS CIPSI Coordinamento di Iniziative Popolari di Solidarietà Internazionale (Italy) CSOs Civil Society Organisations CtC Challenging the Crisis Project DEAR Development Education and Awareness Raising EAPN European Anti-Poverty Network EC European Commission ESF Fundación Economistas sin Fronteras (Spain) FCRE Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica (Italy) FTH Fair Trade Hellas (Greece) IDEA Irish Development Education Association (Ireland) IMVF Instituto Marquês de Valle Flôr (Portugal) MDGs Millennium Development Goals MEP Member of the European Parliament NGOs Non-Governmental organisations NGDOs Non-Governmental development organisations ODA Overseas Development Assistance SDGs Sustainable Development Goals SLOGA Slovenian Global Action (Slovenia) SSE Social and Solidarity Economy YGAs

Young Global Advocates