COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL AND IN CARPATHIAN REGION OF UKRAINE

Abstract

The study aims to compare CSOs at the national and regional (Ukrainian part of Carpathian Euroregion) levels for possible disparities. It is mainly based on the results of secondary analysis of available official statistical and fiscal data, as well as those published in the study reports. In particular, there were analyzed the Bulletins «Activity of the Civic Associations in Ukraine» and «Indicators of United State Registry of the Companies and Organizations of Ukraine» published by the State Statistics Service of Ukraine and its regional departments during 2014-2018. Also the quantitative results of studies done by National Institute for Strategic Studies, Corestone Group and GfK Ukraine, CCC Creative Center, and other institutions were examined. Relevance to the problem of research and its regional boundaries has been employed as a main selection criterion for the secondary data used. Civil society organizations (CSOs) perform exceptional role in providing social services to the inhabitants of the Carpathian region of Western Ukraine. However, they operate in a certain environment significantly influencing respectively their sustainability and capacity to offer high quality services. Obviously, the impact of environment differs regionally, creating unequal opportunities for organizations working in diverse parts of the country. This study aimed to compare CSOs at the national and regional (Ukrainian part of Carpathian Euroregion) levels for possible disparities. The author used secondary analysis of available official statistical and fiscal data, as well as data published in the study reports. He argues that despite actually the same legal, fiscal, and political environment, there are remarkable disparities between CSOs at the national and regional levels. These discrepancies are less evident regarding number and type of operating organizations, their fields of activity but are more significant in respect to available funding and its sources, budgets, staff involved, and environment for philanthropy.