WOMEN AND MEN PARTICIPATION IN

DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
SURVEY RESULTS

Chiinu 2012

1
This report is an independent study conducted by the Centre for Sociological and Marketing Research "CBS-
AXA" from Chisinau commissioned by Center Partnership for Development, with financial support from the
Soros Foundation-Moldova and the Government of Sweden. The analysis and findings of this report,
interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the Soros Foundation-Moldova.

Project coordination team was made up of Ion Jigu, executive director of "CBS-AXA", Vasile Cantarji, project
coordinator and author of the report, project manager at "CBS-AXA", Andrei Rotaru and Btrnescu Veaceslav,
managers of operators network at "CBS-AXA".

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEY FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................................... 4

METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................................... 6

ATTITUDES............................................................................................................................................................... 7

PRIORITIES ............................................................................................................................................................... 9

PARTICIPATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 10

TRANSPARENCY .................................................................................................................................................... 16

ELECTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................... 17

LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................................................................................19

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................................19

3
Key Findings
Attitudes

Public perceptions regarding womens presence in decision-making circles at any level are "male-centered".
About two-thirds of respondents declare themselves supporters of the idea that gender is equally important
within the decision-making representation. At the same time, is alarming the number of those supporting male
decision-making positions (25% -29%).

The distorted acceptance of men in higher level decision-making positions is maintained. Consequently,
women are more accepted and even preferred at lower level decision-making positions (Chairman of the
parent association - 23.5% of acceptances, director of school - 15.9%). But once the importance of the position
increases, the degree of preference of a woman for the job decreases (e.g. only 4, 0% of respondents would
prefer a woman running for president, while 41, 1% would prefer a man).

Priorities

The priority issues to be developed in the perception of respondents are local infrastructure (roads and
bridges, water and sanitation) and social assistance. Priorities seen by women do not differ substantially from
those seen by men. However, some differences are sufficiently pronounced, showing that women are more
concerned with social infrastructure and social services (43.6% of women to 35.7% among men), educational
infrastructure (31.6% to 24.6% respectively) and health services / institutions (28.6% and 23.6%).

Participation

In the case of de facto participation in decision-making process at community level, the "male-centered"
formula appears again. More than a half (56.3%) of respondents has the perception that decisions are made
by men and women alike. On the other hand, 28.1% said that largely it is men who make the decisions and
only 3.3% of respondents believe that women primarily make decisions regarding the development and
renovation of the village.

Decision-makers at the community and national level in Moldova is far from being considered a collective one.
Thus, a very small number of people participate in decision making process. For example, only 0.8% of
respondents are part of (members) a local initiative group and 4.4% are active participants in decision-making
bodies. However, , a higher percentage, 2.0% of respondents, are members of a political party. But even here
participation is very low: 2.8% are not party members, despite being active in them. Thus, only 4.8% of citizens
participate in the life and activity of political parties either as member or as supporter.

From the gender perspective, discrepancies at every level and type of decision-making group (local public
authorities (LPAs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), political parties and initiative groups) are
detrimental to women.

4
Transparency

The activity of formal local government remains unknown, with the awareness of citizens about their activity
being very low. Only one in five respondents declared to be informed, but were informed at different levels
about how decisions are made in their municipality or village council. There were minimal differences
according to the gender of the respondent. We note here that the low level of information is not determined
(at least exclusively) by the non-transparency of local government, but also by the lack of participation and
political culture of the population as a whole. While on the other hand, respondents state that citizens know
their rights regarding information about LPAs activity and participation in their actions. At the same time, the
majority (over two thirds) of respondents are informed about their right to attend local council meetings,
about LPAs obligation to notify the schedule of these meetings, and that citizens are entitled to request
information about LPAs decisions.

Elections

3.5% of respondents said that they plan to run for local elections as a mayor candidate, 7.3% as local councilor
and 4.4% as district councilor. Gender gaps widened in local elections over time. Women were twice less likely
to declare their intention to participate in elections at local or district level than men.

Social Environment is one of the barriers that restrict women's electoral participation at a level comparable to
men. Women are rarely encouraged to participate in politics or run for office.

Distrust in personal traits (21.6% women to 18.6% men believe that they do not have a suitable character),
higher degree demand of women in private life (14.5% women interviewed stated lack of intent is due to the
need to take care of children and family, compared to only 7.0% men) and fear (12.1% women vs. 7.8% men)
are the reasons - specific more to women than to men of withdrawing or not intending to run in local
elections.

5
METHODOLOGY

This research was realized within the OMNIBUS CBS-AXA service

Sample size: 1225 people, ages 18 years and over;

Sample Type: stratified, random, two-staged;

Stratification criteria: 11 geographic regions (which coincides with territorial administrative units
before the process of returning to districts), municipalities Bli and Chiinu, residential (urban-rural),
size of urban areas (2 types), the number of rural population (3 types).

Sampling: urban strata and the total by region (former districts) and rural strata sizes were calculated
in proportion to the population according to data provided by the National Bureau of Statistics of the
Republic of Moldova.
Randomization stages:
I. Location: within the adjusted layers, localities (90) were selected randomly, based on random
number tables.
II. Family: the maximum number of interviews conducted in a sampling point was 5. Families who were
interviewed were selected by random route method, with a statistical step schedule.
III. Person: in case the families selected were formed of several adult people, the respondent was
determined using the method of the nearest birthday.

Representativeness: sample is representative for the adult population of the Republic of Moldova,
with a maximum error of 3%.

Data collection period: September 19-27, 2012. Interviews were conducted at the residence of
respondents. The questionnaire was written in Romanian and Russian , offering respondents the
opportunity to choose the best option for them.

6
ATTITUDES
Reporting subjective perceptions and beliefs in objective social reality formed the Gordian Knot of Social
Sciences, creating approaches that recognize only one of these components and approaches that have sought
to explain through a continuous relationship. Recent efforts in sociological theory aimed to create complex
sociological paradigms have created a tiered model of social analysis (Hage, 1994; Whitmeyer, 1994, Jaffu,
1998, Smelser, 1997). This approach follows the continuum of social reality conception, such as micro-macro,
but especially objective-subjective. Below we reproduce the very successfully illustration of the main levels of
social analysis of George Ritzer.

Macro
I. Macro-objective
II. Macro-
Ex. society, law,
subjective
bureaucracy,
Ex. culture, norms,
architecture, technology,

Subjective
Objective

values
language
IV. Micro-subjective
III. Micro- objective Ex. perceptions,
Ex. patterns of behavior, beliefs, different sides
action and interaction of the social
construction of reality
Micro

Perceptions of gender placement analysis in public and in private inevitably are placed within the objective-
subjective continuum. As we know, social reality is a product of human relations with peers and with the
natural environment and is a reproduction of how people perceive things and adapts them in his/her life. In
this respect, the cause and effect dimension disappears. The perception that "leaders must be men"
(subjective) makes women today to tend less towards "leadership positions" (objective), and by children
seeing "mostly men as leaders" (objective) the perception becomes that "leaders must be men" (subjective).
In this way, the dimensions of objective and subjective continuously reproduce qualitative changes, which
require a long period of actions.
The survey shows the persistence of male-centered perceptions at decision-making level, both in private
and public sectors. On one hand, two thirds of respondents, preferred equal representation in decision-
making process (note that in public life in a higher proportion). On the other hand, respondents stated they
would prefer women 5-6 times less than men to be in decision-making positions.
However, other data indicates a positive trend in recent years. The Gender Barometer, conducted in 2006,
recorded 59.2% respondents that stated that "gender (of the leader) does not matter" in reference to family
(compared to 65.1% at present) and 60.9% chose this option with respect to public life (versus 69.7%
currently).

7
Figure 1. You think that

You think that in a family like yours 5.8% 28.8% 65.1%

You think that in public life: in

5.2% 24.8% 69.7%
administration,politics, workplace

is preferred to be women leaders is preferred to be men leaders

gender of the leader doesn't matter do not know/do not answer

Another feature specific for gender presence approach, which persists in time, is the vertical one that is
reflected both in case of the rank of decision level positions or prestige of the professions. In this case, we
have further evidence that there is a strong correlation between certain decision-rank officials and the
acceptance of women / men in these positions. The preference of women in decision-making positions is
inversely related to the level of the position, with 23.5% of respondents stating they would prefer a woman in
the position of President of Parents Committee and 15 9% as a School Director compared to 4.1% as chairman
of the District Council or deputy and 4.0% as President.

Table 1. Would you prefer a woman or a man for the position of

Gender of the
A Woman A man leader does not NA/NR
matter
Chairman of the committee of parents 23,5% 13,0% 62,7% ,8%
School Director 15,9% 19,4% 64,6% ,2%
Local Council Member 5,6% 20,0% 73,8% ,6%
Mayor 5,4% 33,2% 61,0% ,4%
Member of district/municipal Council 5,0% 20,8% 73,2% 1,0%
Chairman of district council 4,1% 24,9% 70,2% ,8%
Deputy 4,1% 27,9% 67,4% ,6%
President 4,0% 41,1% 54,1% ,9%

8
 PRIORITIES

Development priorities at community level are generally addressed similarly by men and women. At the same
time, as result of increase vulnerability of women, social problems tend to fall on the responsibility of women.
Infrastructure problem of roads and bridges is traditionally recognized as the top development priority for the
whole population (56.0%), followed by water supply infrastructure, social welfare, education, and health.
However, following the differences according to the gender of the respondent, it is clear that social services
are preferred by women to a greater extent, while men prefer more significant proportion of road
infrastructure.

Table 2. What do you think, which are three most pressing problems at present in your community? What can be
done now in first, second and third place for the community?

Total Male Female

Roads and bridges 56.0% 59.0% 53.6%
Water supply and sanitation infrastructure 41.9% 42.4% 41.5%
Social services 40.0% 35.7% 43.6%
Schools, kindergartens, school institutions 28.4% 24.6% 31.6%
GP office / center family doctors / health center 26.4% 23.6% 28.6%
Health care programs 23.6% 23.6% 23.6%
Environment 19.4% 21.8% 17.4%
Gas systems 16.4% 17.5% 15.6%
Community centers / houses of culture 14.7% 16.5% 13.2%
Educational programs 11.2% 11.1% 11.4%
Other problems 10.3% 11.5% 9.5%

9
PARTICIPATION

The distribution of answers to the questions presented below brings us back to the information about the
objective-subjective continuum, since this indicator aims to reflect the objective plan (materialized) on gender
participation in decision making. We see from the table below that the distribution of responses regarding the
person who usually makes decisions in the community is very close to that of the type that is best to make
decisions

Table 3. In your community who usually makes decisions regarding the development or renovation of objects in the
village?

Men Mostly 28,1%

Women and men equally 56,3%
Women Mostly 3,3%
Nobody 3,5%
Somebody Else 0,5%
Do not know/No answer 8,3%

The level of citizen participation in administrative or associative structures is very low. Only 2.6% of
respondents said that they actively participate in the work of district public authority and just 4.2% in the work
of LPAs, less than 1% are members of NGOs and only 3.7% are actively involved in the organizations work.
Political partys members are only 2.0% of respondents and other 2.8% actively involved in their activities. Ad
hoc associations, such as initiative groups, do not have many members or participants. Only 0.8% of
respondents were members of such groups at the time of the interview and 4.4% participated in these
initiatives.
From gender perspectives, regardless of structure, female representation, either formal (members) or
participation without formal status, is lower than male representation. It is remarkable that the largest
discrepancy is in the case of political parties, where the participation rate of men is double that of women.

10
Figure 2. Degree of participation in Community

Political Parties
1.8%
Actively participate 3.9%
2.8%
1.4%
Member 2.6%
2.0%
3.9%
Community

Actively participate 5.1%

initiative
groups /

4.4%
1.0%
Member 0.6%
0.8%
Guvernamental

3.0%
Organizations

Actively participate 4.5% Women

3.7%
Non-

Men
0.7%
Member 1.2% Total
0.9%
3.5%
Local Public

Actively participate 5.1%

Authority

4.2%
0.8%
Member 1.2%
1.0%
2.3%
District Public

Actively participate 3.1%

Authority

2.6%
0.3%
Member 0.2%
0.3%

Citizen participation in specific actions that involve decisions at community level is also quite low. Activities
that involve an increasing number of people are community meetings, although these meetings were
attended only by one out of five community members. Other activities involve less than ten percent of the
population. The gender gap is small, although in most forms of activities, the level of women's participation is
less than mens participation.

11
Table 4 .Have you ever personally participated in the following activities in your community? (Yes, sometimes and Yes,
frequently)

Men Women
Community meetings 18.7% 21.7%
Community Budget Analysis 8.6% 7.1%
Fundraising 8.0% 5.5%
Community Budget Allocation 7.4% 5.3%
Community Projects Development 7.3% 5.9%
Grants received for community development 6.0% 6.5%
Community strategic plan development 5.9% 5.2%
Create conditions for business development 5.0% 4.5%

Obviously, participation at events where decisions are made doesnt mean automatically that the participant's
voice was heard while adopting the decision. When asked how often respondents participate directly in the
decision-making actions, more than 5% of them stated that they often or very often participate, but most
respondents said that do not participate at all in the decision making process.

Table 5. How often do you participate in making the following decisions on the community?

Very
often/ Very Do not
Often Periodically rarely/rarely participate
Men 3.2% 6.1% 23.4% 67.2%
Public Consultation
Women 2.7% 5.4% 19.9% 72.1%
Men 5.2% 12.3% 29.1% 53.5%
Community Meetings
Women 4.4% 11.3% 27.6% 56.8%
Men 3.9% 7.3% 22.3% 66.5%
Community Debates
Women 2.4% 4.6% 22.2% 70.7%
Participation at meetings of specialized Men 2.2% 2.8% 17.0% 78.0%
committees Women 2.1% 3.0% 11.7% 83.2%
Men 1.8% 4.9% 14.5% 78.8%
Participation at local council meetings
Women 2.6% 2.3% 11.4% 83.7%

Eight out of ten respondents said that they have never reviewed basic documents of local government activity
and one out of ten did not know that the Community budget, Strategic Plan and activity reports existed.

Table 6.Have you ever analyzed the following documents of your community?

Yes, I always Yes, a few I did not know

No that such NA/NR
consult times I saw
documents exist

Budget 1,6% 7,5% 81,0% 8,5% 1,3%

Strategic Plan 1,1% 8,1% 77,6% 12,1% 1,1%
Annual Activity Reports of the LPA 1,6% 8,5% 77,0% 10,9% 1,9%
Annual transparency report 1,4% 5,5% 77,6% 13,6% 1,9%

12
Every second respondent (18.8%) had discussions with representatives of LPA on community problems.
Women are in this direction more active than men (20.4% versus 16.8% for men).

Figure 3. Citizen who have talked to employees of LPA on solving community problems, in the last 12 months

25.0%
20.4%
20.0% 18.8%
16.8%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0%
Total Men Women

Forms of communication are different from the community meetings to protests. The most common means of
communication with LPA are public audience and meetings, through which citizen discussed community issues
with representatives of LPA - 57.1% and 45.4% of respondents who previously stated that they also had
discussions with authorities over the last 12 months. Every fourth respondent participated in project proposals
preparation and one in ten has ensured communication with LPA about community issues through public
pressure actions such as protests.

Table 7. What ways have you used in order to address to LPA regarding community issues?

Yes No NA/NR
Audience* 57,1% 40,7% 2,2%
Participation at community meetings 45,4% 51,9% 2,7%
Petitions 35,7% 62,0% 2,4%
Working Sessions 28,3% 69,0% 2,7%
Developing Project Proposals 25,4% 71,9% 2,7%
Public pressure (strike, rally) 10,6% 86,5% 2,9%
*Audience refers to set hours for citizens to present complaints or/and concerns to LPAs.
Every tenth respondent (from the total number of respondents) stated that they would participate in public
pressure activities. The highest degree of availability for participation is recorded for public meetings (about
25%) and audiences (22.9%).

13
Table 8. To what extent would you be willing to attend the following actions to resolve community problems?

To a very To a great
large extent extent
Audience 5,8% 17,1%
Participation at community meetings 3,5% 13,0%
Petitions 4,7% 13,7%
Working Sessions 3,8% 6,2%
Developing Project Proposals 6,6% 11,4%
Public pressure (strike, rally) 7,4% 17,7%

Low level of participation in decision making is determined by several causes, related both to erroneous
perceptions and objective barriers. The primary perception is that decisions can be attributed to a
experienced, well trained and knowledgeable person (mentioned by about one third of respondents at all
levels of decision-making).
Among the objective barriers mentioned is lack of time (20-25%) and financial resources (18-23%). Every fifth
respondent indicated that they felt no one was interested in their opinions.
Lack of interest is also one of the main causes of low participation of citizens in decision-making, especially in
politics (27.8%).
There is evidence of a connection between gender and the participation prohibition from the significant other.
However this connection was rarely presented and there were no differences according to gender.

Table 9 In your opinion, what are the three biggest barriers to effective participation in your ...?

1.Decision-Making 2.Community
3.In
Process within the Development
Politics
community Process
The husband/wife do not allow me 5,3% 2,1% 2,4%
I am uncomfortable with relatives, neighbors, villagers 6,9% 4,7% 4,6%
decisions must be made by persons well trained 37,3% 29,3% 31,5%
I dont have sufficient financial resources to get
20,6% 22,9% 18,1%
involved
nobody is interested in my views/opinions 21,7% 23,3% 22,3%
I am not sufficiently informed 27,7% 26,1% 25,4%
I do not have time to get involved 22,8% 25,2% 19,5%
It is enough that the husband / wife participates 2,0% 5,4% 3,4%
I should take care of children and household 7,7% 9,3% 11,0%
I have no interest, I have more important things to do 18,3% 17,5% 27,8%
Something else 7,3% 5,8% 6,1%
NA/NR 4,6% 6,0% 6,4%

Looking at gender, we note that two barriers specific to women is the prohibition by their partners to be
involved in community decision making related to community issues (6.5% women vs. 3, 9% men) and
embarrassment due to low experience. This may lead to the strong preference, which decisions should be made
by well-educated people (42.3% women and 31.3% men). Also, the obligation to take care of children as
barrier to participation is more specific to women than men (9.8% versus 5.2% for men).This is the only

14
distinguishing factor that differentiates the frequency of participation in decision-making processes related to
community development (11.9% women versus 6.1% men.)

In regards to politics, it is worth noting that women rarely state that lack of financial resources is a barrier
(15.7%) as compared to men (21.1%). On the other hand, women more frequently relinquish participation in
politics because their partner is already involved (5.0%) more so than men (1.6%). Again, the obligation to care
for children and the household is a greater impediment to women (12.7%) than for men (8.9%).

15
TRANSPARENCY

The low level of participation inevitably involves a low degree of information about what is happening in LPAs.
Only one in five respondents declared to be informed at different levels about how decisions are made in the
municipality or village council of residence, with minimal differences in the gender of the respondent.

Table 10.To what extent do you personally know (you are informed) about how decisions are made in ...

Very Rather Rather not Not

NA/NR
Informed Informed informed informed
1. LPA of village/town 2,1% 18,8% 34,4% 43,7% 1,1%
2. Local council of the village/city 1,7% 18,0% 33,4% 45,6% 1,2%

Paradoxically, people seem to be informed about their rights in relation to decision-making transparency and
citizen participation. More than a third of those interviewed stated Yes, for sure and another third stated
"probably yes" that they had the right to attend local council meetings to inquire information about public
decisions adopted by the municipality or that LPA is obliged to announce planned meetings and respond to
public inquiries received from citizens.

Table 11. In your opinion?

Yes for Yes, Probably No for NA/

sure Probably No sure NR
a) Do you have the right as a citizen to participate /
33,6% 36,5% 14,0% 6,1% 9,7%
witness any council meeting
b) The LPA is required to disclose information about
39,2% 35,3% 12,7% 4,4% 8,4%
the time and place of the public meetings
c) Do you have the right as a citizen to request
information from the municipality any decision of 38,2% 36,1% 12,0% 4,9% 8,8%
public interest
d) The LPA is required to respond to requests from
39,7% 35,2% 12,0% 4,9% 8,2%
citizens regarding public information.

16
Elections

Data shows that the gap between men and women in elective bodies at the local level will likely be maintained
over time. Results shows that the number of women who intend to run for the next election in any capacity is
less than half that of men,. Specifically, 5.0% of male respondents said that it is likely or most likely that they
will run for mayor, and with only 2.2% women reporting as such. In the case of local councils positions, the
number of potential female candidates is greater, but the gap remains: 10.2% of men and 5.0% women.
Within the district council, the results are 6.8% and 2.5% respectively.

Figure 4. The share of respondents stating that it is likely or very likely that they will participate in next elections as
candidates for

10.2%

7.3%
6.8%
5.0% 5.0%
4.4%
3.5%
2.2% 2.5%

Mayor Councilor in Local Councilor in District

Council Council

Total Men Women

Men are often encouraged by their social circle to run for elective office. It is interesting to compare the
percentage of those who intend to run and those who are encouraged by someone. For women, the
difference between the percentage of those who are encouraged to apply and those who intend to do so is
greater than for men. For example, 4.9% of women surveyed stated that they have been encouraged to run
for mayor, which is more than double of the percentage of those who intend to run for office. For men, the
gap is smaller 8,45 % are encouraged to run and 5,0 % stated they intend to run

17
Figure 5. Haas anyone ever encouraged/suggested you run for

13.6%
11.3%
9.3%
8.4%
6.5% 6.9%
4.9% 5.0%
3.4%

Mayor Councilor in Local Councilor in District

Council Council

Total Men Women

Data from these graphs show the same barriers to participation in decision making process.
Subjective barriers: not specialized (47.3%), insufficient information (34.3%) or lack of personality (20.3%)
Objective Barriers: lack of financial resources (31.5%) and time (19.7%)
Although the lack of support from spouse is rarely a cause, family care responsibilities are a common
restriction for women to serve in an elective office. 11.2% of all respondents cited the need to take care of
children and household as a barrier to them holding office, but only 7.0% of men stated that this was a barrier,
which is two times less than women (14.5%). Similarly, women cite fear (12.1%) and lack of specific traits
(21.6%) as impediments to apply for candidacy for mayor or councilor.

Table 12.Why did you not run for mayor or councilor?

Total Men Women

I am not prepared 47.3% 45.9% 48.4%
community has people who deserve better than me to fill these positions 42.5% 43.0% 42.2%
I am not sufficiently informed 34.3% 34.2% 34.4%
I do not have sufficient financial resources 31.5% 36.5% 27.7%
I do not have appropriate personality for these positions 20.3% 18.6% 21.6%
I do not have sufficient free time to get involved in this 19.7% 20.9% 18.9%
I do not have interest, I have more important things to do 12.6% 12.4% 12.8%
I should take care of children and household 11.2% 7.0% 14.5%
I am afraid 10.2% 7.8% 12.1%
The age does not allow me to get involved 8.7% 7.9% 9.3%
I will not be supported by relatives 8.0% 8.8% 7.3%
I will not be supported by husband/wife 4.0% 3.1% 4.7%
It will influence negatively my family life 3.5% 2.8% 4.0%
Something else 4.9% 5.7% 4.1%
NA/NR 2.8% 2.4% 3.1%

18
 TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Table 1. Would you prefer a woman or a man for the position of ............................................................................ 8

Table 2. What do you think, which are three most pressing problems at present in your community? What can
be done now in first, second and third place for the community? ................................................................................ 9

Table 3. In your community who usually takes decisions regarding the development or renovation of objects in
the village? .......................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Table 4 .Have you ever personally participated in the following activities in your community? (Yes, sometimes
+Yes, frequently) ................................................................................................................................................................ 12

Table 5. How often do you participate in making the following decisions on the community? .............................. 12

Table 6.Have you ever analyzed the following documents of your community? ..................................................... 12

Table 7. What ways have you used in order to address to LPA regarding community issues? ........................... 13

Table 8. To what extent would you be willing to attend the following actions to resolve community problems? 14

Table 9.What in your opinion are the three biggest barriers to the effective participation in your ...? ................. 14

Table 10.To what extent do you personally know (you are informed) about how decisions are made in ... ....... 16

Table 11. In your opinion? ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Table 12.Why did you not run for mayor or councilor? ................................................................................................ 18

Figure 1. You think that ................................................................................................................................................. 8

Figure 2. Degree of participation in Community ........................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3. Citizen that have talked to employees of LPA on solving community problems, in the last 12 months
.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 4. The share of respondents stating that it is likely or very likely them to participate in next elections as
candidates for ................................................................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 5. Have anyone ever encouraged/suggested you to apply to become .................................................... 18

19