Impact of COVID-19 on Human Security (III): Lithuanian Population Survey, July 2020

The purpose of the study: to explore the views of the Lithuanian population on the social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine with a particular focus on everyday life practices, changes in employment, working practices and the quality of democracy. Major investigated questions: respondents were asked if they were happy. Given the block of questions, they were asked to assess the overall impact of the quarantine on normal daily routine in various areas (financial situation; work - 7 choices in total). The survey was about the most important positive and negative effects on a personal level. Respondents were asked whether they would accept tackling the coronavirus pandemic more effectively by having the surveillance and filming equipment installed in all public spaces; having travel abroad banned for Lithuanian citizens; the arrival to Lithuania banned for foreigners; the freedom of the press restricted, while the personal health data would be open to access. They were asked who is more responsible for preventing a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic from happening – the respondents personally or the government. Later, they were asked to assess the statement that "it would be better to dismiss Seimas and elections, and have a strong leader who can quickly solve anything instead". Later, the survey evaluated respondents’ trust in various institutions (the mayor of the municipality where they currently live; the government of Lithuania), scientists, medical professionals and politicians. Given the block of questions, they were asked whether they felt worried about certain aspects (getting infected with coronavirus; getting infected and not receiving the treatment - 5 choices in total). Respondents were asked whether they currently feel anxious leaving the house and staying in public areas with people once after the quarantine the restrictions on direct contact with others have been lifted. Moreover, they were asked when their daily life will come back to the one they had before the coronavirus pandemic. Later, they were asked how safe they felt before the pandemic and quarantine, during the quarantine, and at present (July 2020). They were asked whether they intend to get vaccinated once the vaccine arrives. Next, the Lithuanian citizens were asked to respond whether during the quarantine period they had given help to anyone outside their family without monetary compensation and if there were enough people to turn to in case of trouble. They were asked to assess the financial situation of the household over the next 12 months. Respondents were asked whether during the quarantine period they had ever needed to see a doctor and how they felt about the risk of a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic affecting Lithuania. Later they were asked about the change in personal income and consumption habits as a result of the quarantine in Lithuania. Respondents were asked to indicate their occupation. Those who reported being unemployed (looking for work) were asked whether they had lost their job as a result of the coronavirus pandemic and the quarantine, and what their chances of finding a job were because of the pandemic. Those who indicated that they were employed were asked whether the quarantine in Lithuania had changed their workload and whether during the quarantine they had started working remotely at least partially. Those who had started working remotely were asked to identify the advantages and disadvantages of remote work, whether they would like to work remotely in the future, and whether the coronavirus pandemic had increased the risk of losing a job. At the end of the survey, both employed and unemployed were asked whether due to the coronavirus pandemic they might need to change their current qualification and/or elevate their existing skills. Socio-demographic characteristics: health, average monthly family/household income, loans, gender, size of the the place, age, marital status, education, size of household, age of children, square metres of the apartment in which one lived during the quarantine.

本研究旨在探讨立陶宛民众对 COVID-19 大流行及其隔离措施所带来的社会影响的看法，特别是对日常生活实践、就业方式及民主质量的变化的关注。主要研究问题包括：调查对象是否感到满意。在一系列问题中，他们被要求评估隔离对日常日常生活各方面（财务状况；工作 - 总共 7 个选项）的整体影响。调查聚焦于个人层面的最重要积极和消极影响。调查对象被问及是否愿意通过在所有公共场所安装监控和录像设备、禁止立陶宛公民出国旅行、禁止外国人进入立陶宛、限制新闻自由以及允许个人健康数据开放访问来更有效地应对冠状病毒大流行。他们还被问及谁更应对防止冠状病毒大流行第二波的发生负责——是受访者本人还是政府。随后，他们被要求评估“解散议会和选举，并拥有一个能够迅速解决问题的强大领导者会更好”这一说法。随后，调查评估了受访者对各种机构（他们目前居住的市的市长；立陶宛政府）、科学家、医疗专业人员和政治家的信任度。在一系列问题中，他们被问及是否对某些方面感到担忧（感染冠状病毒；感染但未得到治疗 - 总共 5 个选项）。受访者被问及隔离结束后，他们是否感到焦虑离开家并在公共场所与他人接触。此外，他们还被问及何时他们的日常生活将恢复到大流行前的状态。随后，他们被问及在大流行和隔离之前、隔离期间以及截至 2020 年 7 月的现状下，他们感到多安全。他们还被问及是否打算在大流行疫苗到达后接种疫苗。接下来，立陶宛公民被问及在隔离期间是否曾向家人以外的人提供帮助且未获得任何经济补偿，以及是否有足够的人可以在遇到麻烦时求助。他们还被要求评估未来 12 个月内家庭的财务状况。受访者被问及在隔离期间是否曾需要看医生以及他们对冠状病毒大流行第二波影响立陶宛的风险的感受。随后，他们被问及由于隔离，个人收入和消费习惯是否发生了变化。受访者被要求说明他们的职业。报告失业（寻找工作）的受访者被问及他们是否因冠状病毒大流行和隔离而失去了工作，以及由于大流行，他们找到工作的机会有多大。报告就业的受访者被问及立陶宛的隔离是否改变了他们的工作量，以及他们在隔离期间是否至少部分地开始远程工作。那些开始远程工作的人被问及远程工作的优点和缺点，他们是否希望在将来远程工作，以及冠状病毒大流行是否增加了失业的风险。在调查的最后，无论是就业还是失业的受访者都被问及由于冠状病毒大流行，他们是否可能需要改变他们当前的资格和/或提高现有的技能。社会人口统计学特征：健康状况、平均每月家庭/家庭收入、贷款、性别、居住地大小、年龄、婚姻状况、教育程度、家庭规模、孩子在隔离期间居住的公寓的面积。