世界銀行-2023財年塞爾維亞國家民意調(diào)查：Pulse報告（英）

July

2023FY

2023

SerbiaCountry

Opinion

Survey

–PulseReportECR

Business

Intelligence

TeamAcknowledgementsTheSerbiaCountry

Opinion

Survey

ispart

of

theCountry

Opinion

SurveyProgram

series

ofthe

World

Bank

Group.

Thisreport

was

prepared

bytheBusiness

Intelligence

(BI)

team,

ledbyJosé

DeBuerba

(SeniorExternal

Affairs

Officer)

and

Svetlana

Markova

(Senior

External

AffairsOfficer).

Yulia

Danilina,

JessicaCameron,

NanLin,and

SofyaGubaydullina

oversaw

thedesign,

reporting,

andanalysis.

NoreenWambui

and

IrinaPopova

provided

data

support.BIacknowledges

thesignificant

contribution

from

the

Serbia

countryteam.

Inparticular,

BI

isgrateful

for

thesupport

from

Gordana

Filipovic(Senior

External

Affairs

Officer)

who

coordinated

thesurvey-relatedactivities

from

Belgrade,

Serbia.ContentsObjectivesOverall

ContextOverall

Attitudes

toward

the

World

BankGroupWorld

BankGroup’s

Work

and

Engagement

onthe

GroundCommunicationsandOutreachSample

DemographicsMethodology3ObjectivesThissurveywas

designed

toassist

the

WorldBankGroup

(WBG)

in

gaining

abetter

understandingabout

howstakeholdersin

Serbiaperceivethe

WBG.

Thesurveyexploredthe

following

questions:1.

What

opinion

dokeystakeholdershaveof

theWBG

when

itcomestoitseffectiveness,relevance,andalignmentwith

Serbia’s

developmentpriorities,as

wellasother

keyindicators?

Are

opinions

improvingor

worsening?2.

Howis

the

WBG

is

perceivedasadevelopmentpartner?

Are

opinions

improvingorworsening?3.

What

keytopics

of

WBGcommunicationsdo

stakeholdersrecall?

Isthere

arelationshipbetween

messagerecallandviewsof

the

WBG’swork?4OverallContext5Familiarity

with

theWorld

Bank

GroupMeanFamiliarity

RatingYear

comparison:

Respondents

inthisyear’s12345678910Country

Survey

reported

significantly

higherlevels

of

familiarity

with

theWorld

Bank

Groupthan

inFY20:AllRespondentsMedia6.8Mean

familiarity:

FY23

=6.8FY20

=5.7.7.47.37.2GovernmentInstitutionBilateral

orMultilateralAgencyOfficeof

thePresident/PM/MinisterCivilSocietyOrganizationLocalGovernmentCollaboration:

Respondents

who

indicated

thattheycollaborate

with

theWBG

inFY23

reportedsignificantly

higher

levels

of

familiarity

with

theinstitution’s

work:Mean

familiarity:

WBG

collaborators

=7.3Non-WBG

collaborators

=

5.97.06.46.2Academia6.1PrivateSector6.0Statistically

similar

across

stakeholder

groupsQHow

familiar

areyou

with

thework

of

theWorld

BankGroup

inSerbia?Scale:1-10(1:

Notfamiliar

atall

–10:

Extremely

familiar)(FY23N=90;

FY20

N=258)6Trust

in

InstitutionsMeanTrustRating123456789107.6TheWorldBankGroup*TheInternationalMonetaryFund*TheUnitedNations(UN)*Privatesector*^6.3TheWBG

and

theInternational

Monetary

Fund

(IMF)continued

tobethemost

trusted

institutions

inSerbiaamong

those

studied.6.96.85.65.5Media,

local

government,

andthenational

governmentwere

theleasttrusted

institutions,

according

torespondents.6.64.96.3Regionaldevelopmentbanks*Serbia’s

Central

Bank*Civilsociety*^5.3Inthisyear’s

survey,

66%of

respondents

indicatedthatthey

collaborated

with

theWBG

as

opposed

tojust28%inFY20.

Because

respondents

who

collaboratewith

theWBG

tendtorate

itmore

positively,

analyseswere

conducted

comparing

collaborators

inFY20

tocollaborators

inFY23

toensure

thattheincreasedratings

over

timewere

not

due

tothegreater

numberof

collaborators

inthe

sample

for

thisyear’s

survey.Indeed,

even

when

just

looking

at

ratings

among

thosewho

collaborate

with

theWBG,

respondents

inFY23rated

their

trustintheWBG,

theIMF,

theUnitedNations

(UN),regional

development

banks,

the

privatesector,

civil

society,

andthemedia

significantly

higherthan

inFY20.6.36.35.55.16.0YouthorganizationsFY23FY205.3Thenationalgovernment*Localgovernment4.55.34.5Media*^3.1QTo

what

extent

do

you

trusteach

ofthe

following

groups

todo

what

isright?Scale:1-10(1:

To

nodegree

atall

–10:

To

averysignificantdegree)*Significantly

different

betweenyears^In

FY23,

“Privatesector”

was

compared

with

the

mean

score

of

“Internationalprivatesector”

and“Domesticprivatesector”,

“Civil

society”

wascompared

with

the

mean

score

of

“Internationalcivil

society”

and

“Domesticcivil

society”,

and“Media”

was

compared

with

the

mean

scoreof

“Domestic

traditionalmedia”,

“Internationalmedia”,

and

“Web-based

media”asasked

inFY20.7AirPollution

isTo

p

Concernin

Relation

toClimateChangeEightof

10respondents

were

very

concerned

about

airpollution

(79%)

interms

of

thepotential

impacts

of

climate

change

inSerbia.

Over

half

of

respondents

were

also

very

concerned

about

thepotential

impact

of

climate

change

on

public

health

(61%);land

and

forest

degradation

(58%);

diminished

water

supply

(56%);

and

unsafe

drinking

water

(53%).AirpollutionEffectsonpublichealth79%61%58%56%53%Land

andforestdegradationDiminishedwatersupplyforpeopleandtheeconomyUnsafedrinkingwaterExtinctionofplant/animalspeciesMorefrequentandseveredroughts/heatwavesMorefrequentandseverefloodsDecreasedcropyields/foodinsecurityLossofjobs47%45%40%37%33%29%VeryconcernedForestfiresClimate-drivenmigration17%16%Increasein

naturaldisastersIncreaseerosionofshoreline12%QWhat

isyour

level

ofconcern

for

each

ofthepotentialimpacts

ofclimate

change

asitaffects

your

country?

(N=~86)(Onlythose

who

responded

“Veryconcerned”

areshown.)8Overall

Attitudes

towardthe

World

BankGroup9Key

Performance

IndicatorsInFY23,

respondents

gave

significantly

higher

ratings

for

theWBG’s

effectiveness

inachieving

results,

relevance

andalignment

with

development

priorities

–as

well

as

its

influence

onthedevelopment

agenda

inSerbia

–as

compared

toFY20.FY23MeanFY20MeanPercentage

pointschange

from

FY20-22+9+13AlignmentRelevance27%45%28%7.5*7.3*6.36.4-22+9+1431%43%27%-23+10+14EffectivenessofachievingresultsInfluence37%41%22%7.1*6.6*6.25.9-11+4+746%48%39%15%18%Endextremepoverty34%6.4Low(1-6)Medium(7-8)High(9-10)*significantly

different

betweenyearsQTheWorld

Bank

Group’sworkis

aligned

with

whatIconsider

thedevelopment

priorities

for

Serbia.

Scale:

1-10

(1:Strongly

disagree

–10:

Strongly

agree)To

whatextentdoestheWorld

Bank

Groupinfluence

thedevelopment

agenda

in

Serbia?

Scale:

1-10

(1:To

no

degree

atall–

10:To

averysignificant

degree)TheWorld

Bank

Groupcurrently

playsarelevantrolein

development

in

Serbia.

Scale:

1-10

(1:Strongly

disagree–10:

Strongly

agree)TheWorld

Bank

Group’sworkis

wellaligned

with

whatIconsider

thedevelopment

priorities

for

Serbia.

Scale:

1-10

(1:Strongly

disagree

–10:

Strongly

agree)^InFY23,Effectiveness

was

compared

withthe

mean

score

of

thetwoquestions

asked

in

FY20:10Overall,please

rateyourimpression

of

theWorld

BankGroup’s

effectiveness

in

Serbia.

Scale:

1-10(1:Noteffective

at

all–

10:

Veryeffective);To

whatextentdoestheWorld

Bank

Group’swork

help

toachieve

development

results

inSerbia?

Scale:

1-10(1:To

nodegree

atall–10:

To

avery

significant

degree)OverallRatingsforIndicator

QuestionsMeanRating12345678910Collaborationwiththenational/federal8.27.6governmentCollaboration:

Respondents

who

collaborate

with

theWBG

hadsignificantly

higher

mean

ratings

for

thetwelve

indictor

questions

askedintheFY23

survey7.9AccesstoWBGstaffandexperts*7.1compared

torespondents

who

donot

collaborate

withtheWBG.

Aggregated

mean

rating

across

all:Collaborationwithotherdonorsand7.87.2developmentpartnersCollaborate

with

WBG

(mean

rating)

=

7.57.8Responsivenesstoneeds*6.1Do

not

collaborate

(mean

rating)

=6.8.The

WBG’s

work

is

well

aligned

withdevelopment

priorities

forSerbia.*7.77.67.6Collaboratewith

theWBG:6.5HowsignificanttheWBG'sknowledgeworkcontributeto

developmentresultsin

Serbia?*FY23FY196.7Because

66%of

respondents

indicated

that

theycollaborate

with

the

WBG

inFY23

compared

tojust28%inFY20,

analyses

were

conducted

comparing

onlythose

who

collaborated

with

theWBG

inFY20

tothosewho

collaborated

with

theWBG

inFY23.

Thiswas

donetoensure

that

theincreased

ratings

over

timewere

notduetothisdifference

inthesample

composition

inthisyear’s

survey.

When

looking

atratings

among

just

thosewho

collaborated

with

theWBG,

respondents

inFY23reported

higher

ratings

for

most

of

theindicatorquestions

(see

chart

at

right).TheWBGcurrentlyplaysarelevantroleindevelopmentinSerbia.*6.7Howeffectivehasthe

WBGbeenin

achievingdevelopmentresultsin

Serbia?7.16.6Towhatextent

doyoutrustthe

WBGtodo

whatis

right?*7.05.95.7Towhatextent

doestheWBGinfluencethedevelopmentagendainSerbia?6.96.36.9Collaborationwithcivilsociety*Collaborationwithprivatesector6.86.2*Significantly

different

betweenyearsQMeanRatingsfor

thetwelve

COSIndicatorQuestionsby

Stakeholder

Groups

onaScalefrom

1

to10.These

selected

indicatorsarelistedatthe

end

ofthisreport.11WBG’s

KnowledgeWorkPerceptions

of

the

significant

contribution

of

the

WBG’s

knowledge

workand

activities

to

development

results

inSerbia

havesignificantly

improved

compared

to

FY20.When

examiningonly

those

respondents

who

collaborate

withthe

WBG,

perceptions

still

improved

significantly

(FY23mean

rating

=7.6;

FY20mean

rating

=6.7).MeanRating123456789107.4SignificantcontributionoftheWBG'sknowledgeworkandactivities*FY23FY206.3*Significantly

different

betweenyearsHowsignificant

acontribution

do

youbelieve

theWorld

Bank

Group'sknowledge

workand

activities

make

todevelopment

results

in

Serbia?Scale:

1-10

(1:Notsignificant

at

all–10:

Verysignificant)Q12World

Bank

Group’s

Work

andEngagement

ontheGround13TheWBG’s

Accessibilityand

ResponsivenessMeanLevelof

AgreementPerceptions

about

access

toWBG

staff

andexperts

and

responsiveness

to

needs

significantlyimproved

compared

toFY20.123456789107.6When

examining

onlythose

respondents

whocollaborate

with

the

WBG,

perceptions

still

improvedsignificantly:Accessto

WBGstaffandexperts*6.8Mean

accessibility

rating:FY23

=7.9FY20

=7.1.FY23FY207.5Mean

responsiveness

rating:FY23

=7.8FY20

=6.1.Responsivenessto

needs*5.9*Significantly

different

betweenyearsTo

what

extent

isthe

World

BankGroup

an

effective

development

partnerinSerbia,interms

ofeach

ofthe

following?,

Scale:1-10(1:To

nodegree

atall

–10:

To

averysignificantdegree)Q14WBGasaDevelopmentPartner

and

CollaboratorMeanLevelof

Agreement123456789107.9Respondents

gave

the

highest

mean

ratings

for

theWBG’s

collaboration

with

the

national

government,closelyfollowed

byother

donors

and

developmentpartners.Thenationalgovernment*Otherdonorsanddevelopmentpartners*Regional

developmentbanks^Civilsociety*7.27.7Inaddition,

perceptions

about

theWBG’s

collaborationwith

thegovernment,

other

donors

and

developmentpartners,

civil

society,

andtheprivate

sector

significantlyimproved

compared

toFY20.6.87.2FY23FY20When

examining

onlythose

respondents

who

collaboratewith

theWBG,

perceptions

ofthe

WBG’s

collaborationwith

civil

society

stillimproved

significantly

(FY23

mean

=6.9;FY20

mean

=5.7).

Ratings

for

theWBG’scollaboration

with

thenational

government

andotherdonors

trended

inthesame

direction,

but

they

didnotreach

statistical

significance.6.86.76.75.7Localgovernment^Privatesector*6.0*Significantly

different

betweenyears^Not

asked

in

FY20QTo

what

extent

isthe

WBG

aneffective

development

partnerin

Serbia,in

terms

ofcollaboratingwith

the

following

groups:

(1-Stronglydisagree,10-Stronglyagree)15Communicationsand

Outreach16Recent

Engagement

with

theWBGEight-six

percent

of

respondents

recalled

hearing

or

seeing

something

about

the

WBG

inthelast

30days.

Thosewhocollaborate

with

the

WBG

were

significantly

more

likelytorecall

hearing

or

seeing

something

(95%)

thanthose

who

donotcollaborate

(68%).Over

halfof

respondents

(53%)

recalled

having

direct

contact

withWBGstaff

(for

example,

inperson,

virtually,

byphone,

oremail)

or

recalled

receiving

information

about

theWBG

at

its

event/conference/seminar

(52%).About

4of

10respondents

reported

seeing

information

on

social

media

(38%).

Among

thoserespondents,

LinkedIn

was

usedmost

often(64%),

followed

byFacebook

(36%),

Instagram

(29%),

Twitter

(29%),

and

YouTube

(18%).Percentage

ofRespondentsDirect

contactwithWBGstaffEvent/conference/seminarTelevision(TV)53%52%64%41%38%30%22%Socialmedia36%Newspapers(Printoronline)WBGWebsite29%29%18%e-Newsletters8%5%RadioLinkedIn

Facebook

Instagram

TwitterYouTubeDirect

messagingOther5%5%Blogs

1%Podcasts

1%Doyou

recallseeingorhearinganything

about

theWBG

inthelast30

days?

(N=86)Where

do

you

recallseeingorhearingthisinformation?

(Checkallthat

apply)

(N=73)What

socialmedia

platforms

do

you

recallseeingthisinformation

on?(Checkall

that

apply)

(N=28)Q17Topics

RecalledPercentage

ofRespondentsWBGglobaleconomicforecastsWBGwork

orresearchonclimatechangeWBGwork

orresearchonenergy49%Of

those

respondents

who

recalled

seeing

or

hearingsomething

about

the

WBG

inthelast

30days,approximately

halfrecalled

seeing

or

hearing

abouttheWBG’s

global

economic

forecasts

(49%).

Athird

ofrespondents

recalled

WBG

work

orresearch

on

climate

change

(35%).35%26%WBGwork

orresearchonhumancapital24%WBGresearchorworkin

supportforeducationsystemsindevelopingcountries19%Other15%WBGwork

orresearchoncreatingmoreandbetterjobs13%WBGwork

orresearchonfoodinsecurity8%WBGwork

to

providedebtrelieffordevelopingcountries4%QWhat

topicswere

includedinwhat

you

saworheard?

(Checkallthat

apply)

(N=72)18Message

RecallandPerceptions

about

theWBG’s

WorkMeanLevelof

Agreement12345678910Agreement

that

theWBG

helps

countriesboost

climate

resilience

andmitigate

theeffects

of

climate

challenge

was

highestacross

all

respondents

(mean

rating

=7.5).7.8TheWBGhelps

countriesboost

climateresilienceandmitigatetheeffectsofclimatechallenge*5.7Thoserespondents

who

recalled

seeing

orhearing

something

about

theWBG

inthe

last30days

tended

tohave

higher

levels

ofagreement

about

keymessages

regarding

theWBG’s

work

(see

thechart

ontheright)

–significantly

sofor

messages

about

theWBG’swork

on

climate,

energy,

and

education.7.77.6TheWBGsupportscountriestoensure

transitiontomorediversifiedandcleanersourcesofenergy*6.0TheWBGprovidessupporttoimproveaccessandqualityofeducationindevelopingcountries.*5.9Heardabout

theWBGinthelast30daysTheWBGsupportscountriestostrengthentheirhumancapitalthroughimprovinghealthcare,nutrition,education,jobs,and

skills7.2Haven'theardabout

theWBGinthelast30days6.2TheWBGhelps

addressthecurrentfoodcrisisandenablesgreaterpreparednesstofuturefoodsecuritycrises7.15.55.4TheWBGis

committedtocomprehensivedebtsolutionsthatbringsignificantbenefitstopeopleinpoorcountries6.5*Significant

difference

betweengroupsQDoyou

recallseeingorhearinganything

about

theWBG

inthelast30

days?

(N=86)To

what

extent

do

you

agreewith

the

following

statements:

Scale:1-10(1:To

nodegree

atall

–10:

To

averysignificantdegree)19SampleDemographics20Respondent

Profile:

Affiliation,GenderCurrent

AffiliationPercentage

ofRespondentsGovernmentInstitutionCivilSocietyOrganizationMedia30%Gender16%16%FemaleMale47%LocalGovernmentBilateral/MultilateralAgencyAcademia13%53%10%8%PrivateSector7%OfficeofthePresident,PrimeMinister,

Minister1%QWhich

ofthe

following

best

describesyour

current

affiliation?

(Selectonly1response)

(N=90)What’s

your

gender?

(N=90)21Respondent

Profile:Collaboration

withthe

WBGCollaboration

with

theWBGCollaboration

Institution34%YesNoTheWorldBank(IBRD/IDA)95%66%TheInternationalFinanceCorporation(IFC)5%QCurrently,

doyou

professionallycollaborate/work

with

theWorld

BankGroup

(IBRD,

IFC,MIGA,ICSID)

in

your

country?

(N=90)Which

ofthe

following

agencies

oftheWorld

BankGroup

do

you

primarilycollaborate/work

with

in

Serbia?(Selectonly1response)

(N=59)22Methodology23MethodologyStatistical

AnalysisFromMarch

2023

toMay2023,

atotal

of244

stakeholders

of

theWBG

inSerbia

wereinvitedtoprovidetheir

opinions

about

theWBG’s

workinthe

country

byparticipating

inaCountry

OpinionSurvey(COS).Participants

weredrawnfrom

theOffice

of

thePresident,

PrimeMinister,

orMinister;government

institutions;local

governments;

bilateral

/multilateral

agencies;

theprivatesector;

civil

society;academia,

research

institutes,

think

tanks,and

the

media.Scale

bucketing:When

mentioning

Low,

Medium,and

High

inthescalesthroughout

this

report:1-6

islow;7-8ismedium;

and

9-10ishigh.Statistical

significance:Key

statistically

significant

findings

are

denoted

with

anasterisk

(*)throughout

thereport

or

discussed

inthedescriptions

tothe

charts.Significance

ismeasured

atp-value

<.05A

total

of90

stakeholders

participated

in

thesurvey(36.9%response

rate).Respondents

completed

thequestionnairevia

anonline

platform.Everycountry

that

engages

intheCOSmust

include

specificindicator

questions;

several

ofthem

are

aggregated

for

the

WorldBank

Group’s

annual

Corporate

Scorecard

(please

refer

totheIndicatorquestions

section

ofthis

report.24Comparison

of

FY20

and

FY23PercentageofRespondentsFY2020FY2023Theresults

ofthis

year’sCountry

Surveywerecompared

tothoseof

theCountrySurveyconductedin

FY20(witharesponse

rate

of16%,N=258).High-level

government

office:

Office

ofthe

President,PrimeMinister,

Minister,Parliamentarian7%1%Comparing

responses

acrossCountry

Surveys

reflectschanges

inattitudes

over

time,aswellas

changes

inrespondent

samples

and

changes

tothesurveyinstrument

itself.

To

reduce

theinfluence

ofthe

latterfactor,

only

those

questions

withsimilar

responsescales/options

are

analyzed.Government

institutions:

Employee

ofaMinistry

/Ministerial

department

/Projectimplementation

unit

/

Independentgovernment

institution(e.g.,Centralbank,regulatoryoroversightagency)

/

Judiciary

/State-ownedenterprise28%30%Localgovernment11%11%13%10%The

distribution

ofthe

stakeholder

groupsinthe

finalsamples

for

the

FY20and

FY23Country

Surveysarelisted

inthe

table

onthe

right.Bilateral/multilateralagency:embassy,development

organization,development

bank,

UN

agencyAdditionally,

for

this

year,

the

COSproject

utilizedthePulse

Surveyformat,

whichisashorter

versionconducted

entirely

online

bythe

COSteam.

The

listofrespondents

wasidentified

and

provided

solely

by

thecountry

team,

whichindicates

ashift

inthestakeholdercomposition

compared

toFY20.Inthe

previous

survey,at

least20%

ofthe

respondents

wereprovided

byalocalfielding

agency.Civil

SocietyOrganization:NGO/community-based

organization,priv