2 Survey Results
2.1 Social Capital, Networks & Trust
In order to assess the ease with which the SI networks can be formed and activated within the NMS societies, and according to the hypotheses we made with regard to the implications of social capi-‐
tal specifics for the formation and functioning of Ac-‐
tor-‐Networks envisaged for SI activities, we aimed to assess the network formation smoothness and the level of social capital and trust in the CEE countries from the point of view of the expert panel.
2.1.1 Interessement1
As mentioned in the previous parts of this re-‐
search work, interessement is the first phase after the problematisation phase in the translation pro-‐
cess envisaged in Actor-‐Network Theory for realisa-‐
tion of innovations. Interessement describes the process through which the network builder(s) in-‐
vites or ‘interests’ the as-‐yet-‐undefined actors to perform the identities prescribed by the network builder(s) in the problematisation phase (i.e. defin-‐
ing the problem and stakeholders). In order to as-‐
sess such attribute in the SI networks in the specific context of NMS countries, we asked the following question from the expert panel:
How difficult/easy is it to bring common public and experts/policy-‐makers together or connect them virtually, in order to start discussing such [social in-‐
novation] topics?
While 57% of the respondents believe that cur-‐
rently it is difficult/rather difficult to bring common public and experts/policy-‐makers together or con-‐
nect them virtually in order to start discussing such topics, much more of them (83%) believe that this was difficult/rather difficult in 10-‐15 years ago (see Table 1).
Romania, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia, are the only 3 countries in which the number of expert votes expressing the interessement process as being currently easy/rather easy dominates, while Slove-‐
nia is the only country in which that number domi-‐
nated in 10-‐15 years ago.
The case of smooth interessement phase in the Czech Republic and Slovakia (at present) and Slove-‐
nia (although it is in the time of 10-‐15 years ago) is in accordance with our hypothesis made at the theo-‐
retical part of the research, based on high level of bridging social capital in these countries. The case of smooth interessement phase in Romania at the pre-‐
sent time was not included in the hypothesis made due to lack of data about social capital level.
1 It must be noted that, although the translation process in the ANT theory starts with problematisation phase, but since this phase is only about defining the problem and the identities by the network builder, we do not consider it to be meaningfully influenced by the context specifics. Hence, we start the research questions from the next phase, which is interessement.
Currently 10-‐15 Years ago Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy
Bulgaria 4 3 1
Romania 1 3 1 3
Croatia 1 1 1 1
Slovenia 1 1 2
Poland 1 3 1 3 1 1
Hungary 2 1 2 1
Czech 4 5 1 2 5 1 1
Slovakia 1 2 3
Latvia 2 1 2 1
Total 5 15 13 2 14 15 5 1
Table 1. Expert panel view on the difficulty/easiness of bringing various partners together to start discussing social innovation in NMS (N=35)
2.1.2 Enrolement
As mentioned in the previous parts of this re-‐
search work, enrolment is the third phase after the problematisation and interessement phases in the translation process envisaged in Actor-‐Network Theory for realisation of innovations. Enrolment is the phase when another actor accepts the interests
defined by the focal actor by accepting the solution proposed by the network builder(s). In order to as-‐
sess such attribute in the SI networks in the specific context of NMS countries, we asked the following question from the expert panel:
When brought together or connected, how diffi-‐
cult/easy is it to reach a consensus on the proposed solution?
Currently 10-‐15 Years ago
Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy
Bulgaria 2 2 2 2
Romania 1 1 2 3 1
Croatia 2 1 1
Slovenia 1 1 1 1
Poland 1 2 2 3 2
Hungary 2 1 2 1
Czech 8 2 2 5 2
Slovakia 2 1 1 1 1
Latvia 3 3
Total 7 21 8 0 17 13 5 0
Table 2. Expert panel view on the difficulty/easiness of reaching consensus among various parties on a proposed social innovation in NMS (N=35)
According to the table 2, while 78% of the re-‐
spondents believe that currently it is difficult/rather difficult to reach a consensus on the proposed solu-‐
tion, 86% of them believe that this was diffi-‐
cult/rather difficult in 10-‐15 years ago.
Romania and Slovenia are the only 2 countries in which the number of expert votes expressing the enrolment process as being currently easy/rather easy is equal to those voting it to be difficult/rather difficult, while Slovenia is the only country in which that number is equal in 10-‐15 years ago as well.
The case of relatively smooth interessement phase in Slovenia (at present as well as in the time of 10-‐15 years ago) is in accordance with our hypothe-‐
sis made at the theoretical part of the research. The case of relatively smooth enrolment phase in Roma-‐
nia at the present time was not hypothesised about due to lack of data on social trust there. The Czech Republic and Hungary data is not as good as the hy-‐
pothesis proposed, as most of the respondents be-‐
lieve reaching consensus about a solution is (rather) difficult in these countries.
2.1.3 Mobilisation
As mentioned earlier, mobilisation is the fourth phase after the problematisation, interessement and enrolment phases in the translation process envis-‐
aged in Actor-‐Network Theory for realisation of in-‐
novations. Mobilisation describes the phase when the network starts to operate target-‐oriented to im-‐
plement the proposed solution. In order to assess such attribute in the SI networks in the specific con-‐
text of NMS countries, we asked the following ques-‐
tion from the expert panel:
When consensus is reached on the solution, how difficult/easy is to engage all stakeholders in order to implement and sustain it effectively?
Currently 10-‐15 Years ago
Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy Difficult Rather
difficult Rather
easy Easy
Bulgaria 2 2 3 1
Romania 1 3 4
Croatia 1 1 1 1
Slovenia 2 2
Poland 1 4 2 3
Hungary 3 2 1
Czech 2 6 2 3 5 1
Slovakia 1 2 1 2
Latvia 1 2 3
Total 14 20 2 0 19 15 1 0
Table 3. Expert panel view on the difficulty/easiness of engaging various stakeholders to implement and sustain social innovation in NMS (N=35)
95% of the respondents believe that currently it is difficult/rather difficult to engage all stakeholders in order to implement and sustain it effectively, 97%
of them believe that this was difficult/rather difficult in 10-‐15 years ago.
No country appears, according to the expert panel votes, to have smooth mobilisation phase at the present time or in 10-‐15 years ago. However, the data provided for the Czech Republic seems more optimistic than the others, as there exist a number of
expert panel votes finding the process to be rather difficult/rather easy, and this number dominates the data for the country. This case of relatively less diffi-‐
cult mobilisation phase in the Czech Republic (at present as well as in the time of 10-‐15 years ago) is in accordance with our hypothesis made at the theo-‐
retical part of the research based on higher level of bonding social capital in the country. The other countries’ survey data does not comply with the op-‐
timism found based on high level of binding social capital.
2.1.4 Volunteering to help the Marginalised Besides the network formation process attrib-‐
utes mentioned above, there would be a need to as-‐
sess how willing the actors are to address the specif-‐
ic problem that is targeted by social innovations (in the framework of SIMPACT project, it means mar-‐
ginalisation of specific groups in the society). This also concerns the problematisation phase in the translation process in ANT framework, as for in-‐
stance, the willingness level of people for volunteer-‐
ing can also have implications for willingness of network builders to ‘problematise’ and trigger the actor-‐network. In order to approximate the volun-‐
teering readiness in the concerned societies, we asked the following question from the expert panel:
How willing are common people to participate in volunteering activities to help or support disadvan-‐
taged or marginalised groups?
Currently 10-‐15 Years ago
Low Rather
low Rather
high High Low Rather
low Rather
high High
Bulgaria 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Romania 3 1 2 2
Croatia 1 1 1 1
Slovenia 2 1 1
Poland 3 2 3 2
Hungary 2 1 2 1
Czech 1 1 7 1 5 1 1
Slovakia 3 2 1
Latvia 1 2 2 1
Total 5 16 13 1 13 14 5 2
Table 4. Expert panel view on the willingness of common people in NMS to participate in volunteering activities (N=35)
The willingness of common people to partici-‐
pate in volunteering activities to help or support vulnerable or marginalised groups has increased in the Central and Eastern European countries com-‐
pared to 10-‐15 years ago, according to the expert panel opinion (see Table 4). By 40% of experts the mobilisation for volunteering activities is assessed to be easy/rather easy, compared to 20% 10-‐15 years ago.
The Czech Republic is the only country in which currently the willingness clearly dominates the un-‐
willingness according to the assessment by the ex-‐
pert panel, while 10-‐15 years ago, in no country such clear dominance of willingness to participate could be observed.
2.1.5 Vertical Trust
Social trust is typically investigated in three di-‐
mensions: a vertical one (in relation to different in-‐
stitutions) and two horizontal ones – private (to-‐
wards individuals one knows) and generalised (to-‐
wards most people). In order to approximate the vertical trust in the concerned societies, we asked the following question from the expert panel:
How would you reflect on the current level of people’s trust in institutions?
We also asked the same question as if the level of trust is compared to the period 10-‐15 years be-‐
fore, using the following questions:
How would you reflect on the current level of people’s trust in institutions compared to 10-‐15 years ago?
Local Institutions Central Institutions
Currently 10-‐15 Years ago Currently 10-‐15 Years ago
De-‐
crease Same In-‐
crease De-‐
crease Same In-‐
crease De-‐
crease Same In-‐
crease De-‐
crease Same In-‐
crease
Bulgaria 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1
Romania 1 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 2 3
Croatia 1 1 1 1 2 2
Slovenia 1 1 1 1 2 2
Poland 3 2 2 3 5 4 1
Hungary 3 3 3 3
Czech 1 5 4 5 4 7 3 7 1 1
Slovakia 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1
Latvia 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Total 9 17 11 10 15 11 27 9 0 23 10 3
Table 5. Expert panel view on the level of peoples’ trust local/central institutions in NMS (N=35)
People’s trust in central institutions has been decreasing in the region, according to the expert panel opinion. Slovakia is the only country in which people’s trust in central institutions has remained the same, according to bigger share of the expert panel from the country (see Table 5).
However, when it comes to the people’s trust in local institutions, according to the expert panel, in general it has been increasing. The countries in which this increase has been assessed more clearly include Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia and Romania. Only in Hungary all experts have ex-‐
pressed decreasing trend in people’s trust in local institutions.
2.1.6 Horizontal Trust
In order to approximate the horizontal trust in the concerned societies, we asked the following question from the expert panel:
How would you reflect on the current level of people’s trust in other people-‐ In case of trust in indi-‐
viduals we differentiate between friends/family mem-‐
bers and not-‐familiar members of public?
We asked the same question as if the level of trust is compared to the period 10-‐15 years before, using the following questions:
How would you reflect on the current level of people’s trust in other people compared to 10-‐15 years ago?
The level of people’s trust in their friends/fami-‐
ly members has increased, according to the expert panel estimation (see Table 6). This is more clearly pronounced in Slovenia, Czech Republic, and Roma-‐
nia, when compared to 10-‐15 years ago. In Slovakia, this aspect of trust is rather decreased, according to the expert panel.
On the contrary, the level of people’s trust in other people – not-‐familiar members of public – has in general decreased in the region, except in Poland, and in the Czech Republic, when compared to 10-‐15 years ago.