FSD2591 Development Cooperation Survey 2010

Aineisto on käytettävissä (B) tutkimukseen, opetukseen ja opiskeluun.

Lataa aineisto täältä

Muunkieliset kuvailuversiot

Aineistoon liittyvät tiedostot

  • Aineistoon ei liity muita kuvailevia tiedostoja


  • Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland


UN Millennium Development Goals, developing countries, development aid (international), development policy, disaster relief, economic recession, global warming, information sources, international cooperation, public expenditure, voluntary aid

Sisällön kuvaus

The survey charted Finnish opinions on and knowledge of the country's development cooperation, its importance, content, objectives, and allocation. Some questions focused on the UN Millennium Development Goals.

The respondents were asked whether they considered development cooperation to be important, and why. The respondents who thought development cooperation was very or fairly important (q1 = 1 or 2, n=797) were asked why they considered it important. The question was open-ended but the responses have been classified into variables q2_1 - q2_21. Opinions on the most important goals, activities (e.g. education, health care, industry), and key geographical areas for Finnish development cooperation were charted. Familiarity with the UN Millennium Development Goals and views on the most important goals were surveyed. The respondents who were familiar with the UN Millennium Development Goals (q6 = 2, n= 219) were asked whether they can name one goal or more (q7_1 - q7_10). One topic pertained to the most important information sources on development cooperation issues. Some questions focused on development cooperation and its importance, the most important goals for Finland's development policy, and areas/activities in which Finland has something to give to developing countries.

Views were probed on whether development cooperation increased international security, how Finland should support developing countries in climate change issues, and who should help developing countries to survive the global financial crisis (e.g. rich countries, EU countries, the private sector, every country should manage on its own). Some questions pertained to whether there was enough information available on development cooperation, development policy and developing countries, whether more information should be available on some topics, and how reliable public authorities, voluntary/civic organisations and the media were as sources of such information.

The respondendents were asked to choose the four most important forms of development cooperation. Factual knowledge was charted by asking how much they thought Finland was going to spend on development cooperation in 2010 (in euros). Opinions were probed on how much Finland should spend in 2015 (as per cent of the GNP). The respondents were also asked whether Finland should increase the amount of funding allocated to development cooperation in the light of the current financial situation. Those who thought funding should be increased were asked how the increase should be financed (e.g. by cutting other state expenditure or by increasing tax revenue). All respondents were asked whether Finnish development cooperation was effective and successful.

Opinions were explored on the greatest challenges of development cooperation. Satisfaction with Finland's actions in connection with different crises and natural disasters was investigated. The respondents were asked in what way they as individuals could best help developing countries. Finally, the respondents were presented with a few statements and asked which statement best described their views on the impact of development aid in general.

Background variables included the respondent's gender, age, occupational status and economic activity, marital status, occupation of the household head, household composition, age of children living at home, education, gross annual income of the household, newspaper reading and television viewing habits, type of accommodation, municipality size and type, major region (NUTS2) and region (NUTS3) of residence, ownership of car, home, holiday home, consumer durables and mobile phone, and Internet use.

Aineiston kuvailu koneluettavassa DDI 2.0 -formaatissa

Creative Commons License
Aineiston kuvailu on lisensoitu Creative Commons Nimeä 4.0 Kansainvälinen -lisenssin mukaisesti.