I. The Economic Downturn is Reshaping Civic Engagement [24]Ohio Civic Health Index Report 2009November 10, 2009
Downloads With these changes, it is no surprise that some Americans say they are changing the way they help others. Our survey does not measure rates of volunteering or active citizenship in a way that permits precise estimates of trends over time—the Census Current Population Supplement is a better vehicle for that. But we asked Americans their perception of the effect of the recession on their own and their neighbors’ engagement. The responses suggest that many are less able to volunteer, and are refocusing their compassion toward others in ways that are much closer to home and responding to urgent needs during this time of economic hardship. Ohioans are Turning Inward and Cutting Back on Civic Engagement in Tough Economic Times. In our survey: 80% of respondents said they had cut back on the time they had spent volunteering, participating in groups, and doing the other civic activities included in the Civic Health Index (see the Appendix for the full list). This does not mean that 80% have stopped participating, only that they say they are participating less.25 66% said that people are responding to the current economic downturn by looking out for themselves, while only 21% said people around them are responding to the recession by helping each other more. 15% of those surveyed agreed that “people wish they could do more but cannot find a way.” 12% felt that traditions of service from earlier times are being revived. With news about budget and job cuts everywhere, one of the reasons for a decline in engagement—or perceived decline— could be a reduction in disposable income and time. Another reason could be budget problems in the civic infrastructure. Nonprofit organizations might, for instance, have had to lay off people who coordinated volunteering opportunities. The same thing may be happening in schools. Thirty-two percent of the sample said they knew about budget cuts in local schools. This may mean budget cuts in various civic- and service-related activities, such as unpaid internships, events that need volunteers and community newsletters that advertise events. In fact, as of May 2009: 32% of the sample reports their local schools have cut staff and budget; just 2% report increases. 12% of the sample says they serve on a nonprofit board or committee that has a budget. Of those, 22% have cut their budget and 10% have increased it. Of this group, at the time of the survey, less than 3% say their organization has received stimulus funding from the federal government. This is the second year of research on Ohio’s civic health. We are not in a good position to evaluate whether the responses reported above are typical of past behavior. However, we can take advantage of NCoC’s research over the last three decades. NCoC’s America’s Civic Health Index is composed of some forty indicators (listed in the Appendix) and civic health as measured by the Index has consistently risen when unemployment has been high.26 Perhaps people generally increase their civic engagement when economic problems mount—not only by helping other citizens, but also by becoming more politically active and more attuned to news, as reflected in other measures of the Civic Health Index. On the basis of that relationship, we might have predicted that civic engagement would rise in the current economic climate. There is an exception in NCoC’s longitudinal data: the severe recession of 1981-1983, when unemployment reached double digits. In that period, the Civic Health Index fell significantly. Meeting attendance, religious attendance, and volunteering were some of the components that fell in that period and pushed the Index down. It is possible that we are seeing an analogous civic decline in the current recession. This year NCoC hypothesized that in severe recessions there could be a kind of threshold effect: growing need usually encourages more engagement, but not when economic pressures on individuals and organizations become too great and people have to turn inward. Unemployment and other economic pressures would only be one aspect of this problem; another aspect would be funding cuts in nonprofit organizations and agencies that provide opportunities for civic engagement. Civil society in contemporary America revolves around programs with budgets, funders, and paid staff; it is therefore vulnerable to cuts. Although NCoC does not yet have hard data to gauge national trends in the nonprofit sector during this recession, in their 2009 National Report they draw upon anecdotal evidence to suggest a somewhat paradoxical situation. “On one hand, there is an increase in the number of people who are available and willing to volunteer their time; but on the other, there is nowhere for them to go. There are laid-off workers who are willing to volunteer substantial amounts of time as unpaid interns to keep up their skills and open up networking opportunities.27 In fact, Volunteer.org has reported a 30% increase in the number of visitors this year, and Big Brothers Big Brothers of Philadelphia experienced a 25% increase in the number of inquiries about becoming a mentor.28 Some Americans are willing to spend more hours volunteering because they cannot give cash.29 On the other hand, the government/nonprofit sector has seen the worst job cuts among all sectors and many are unable to take advantage of the willing volunteers. Lay-offs appear to be happening most significantly in smaller nonprofits that rely on private donors and small grants, but are also occurring in large agencies.30 Last winter, a survey of employers conducted by National Association of Colleges and Employers suggested that employers planned on reducing the number of internships by nearly 21%.31 In the [2009] Civic Health Index, states that had the highest unemployment rates had lower volunteering rates than states that had lower unemployment rates.32 The 2009 National and Ohio surveys find evidence that we are directly helping people close to ourselves by giving food and shelter to relatives and non-relatives in need. These forms of civic engagement need to be further explored as they are every bit as critical as charity walks and volunteering events that are typically more common among affluent Americans. Almost half of all respondents in both surveys had given food or money to a relative or a non-relative in the last year (31% reported doing both). In focus groups that The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE) conducted before the 2008 election, giving people shelter emerged as a demanding form of “service” offered by some people who were not otherwise involved in civic life. Seventeen percent of the National respondents reported providing shelter to a relative; 11% allowed someone other than a relative to live in their home or property; 6% did both; the comparable Ohio statistics are 16%, 11%, and 6%. We do not know whether these forms of assistance have grown during the recession; certainly, the need for them has. Some Political Engagement Continues After the Election In the 2008 Ohio Civic Health Index, conducted before the presidential nominating conventions, participants were asked whether they expected to engage after the election in four possible ways: • contacting elected officials about issues raised in the campaign, • contacting the media about such issues, • discussing such issues with friends, and • working to change local policies in schools, workplaces, etc. In 2009, we asked respondents whether they had actually engaged in these ways since Election Day 2008. Most (70%) had not done any of the behaviors; only 2% claimed to have done all four activities. The results for specific activities were generally consistent with people’s expectations a year ago, except in all instances Ohioans were less active than predicted. The 2008 election may have produced a substantial stimulus for public discussion and deliberation -- discussing issues with friends is the most common activity (27%) -- but it is clear that most citizens are not politically engaged.33 ECONOMIC CLIMATE 30% of Ohio households reported the loss of a job by one of its members (compared to 20% of national households as reported in the NCoC’s 2009 Civic Health Index) 40% of Ohio households had trouble affording food or medication (compared to 31% of national households) 14% of Ohio households had an individual (the respondent or another member of the household) who fell behind in mortgage payment or lost their homes to foreclosure (compared to 7% of national households) Note: These three items were asked of only half of the Ohio respondents (N = 198). If you like this kind of content, sign up for an NCoC.net account and we'll customize your homepage recommendations based on your interests..
|
Recently Popular Tags
Baby Boomers
Business
Charitable Donations
Citizenship
Civic Engagement
Civic Health
Civic Learning
Deliberative Democracy
eCitizenship
Economy
Education
Elections
Expressing Political Views
Family & Friends
Gender
Generations
GenX
Government
Military
Millennials
Participating in Politics
Philanthropy
Policy
Political Involvement
Politics
Public Policy
Race
Religion
Service
Service-Learning
Social Entrepreneurship
Staying Informed
Trust
Understanding Politics & Government
Volunteering
Voting
|
||
| 202.955.6183 | conference@ncoc.net 1201 15th Street NW • Suite 420 • Washington, DC 20005 Copyright © 2000-2013 The National Conference on Citizenship. All Rights Reserved Privacy Policy | Glossary of Terms |
Follow Us on:    |
||
