Impact of COVID-19 on Human Security (I): Lithuanian Population Survey, December 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 the quality of democracy. Major investigated questions: respondents were asked how safe they currently feel in general, more specifically in their local environment, their place of residence, Lithuania, the European Union and the world. Given the block of questions, they were asked to rate their content with some aspects of their life (living conditions, personal security - 5 choices in total). They were asked if they were happy and how life in Lithuania and their personal life has changed over the last 12 months. Several statements were used to explore their views on how they feel about their life (I always feel optimistic about the future - 3 choices in total). People were asked to assess whether they have full freedom of choice and decide for themselves how to live their lives or whether in life there is little that depends on them, and whether it is people’s responsibility to look after their own well-being or is it the state that has to look after their well-being. They were asked if, while thinking about the future, they feel anxious about the fate of one’s self, their loved ones, the state of Lithuania, and the whole world. They were asked how important world problems are for Lithuania (military conflicts beyond the EU borders - 4 choices in total). Asked how they feel about the risk of contracting COVID-19 personally. Respondents were asked when the coronavirus pandemic will end and whether they would agree with a mandatory coronavirus vaccination. Opinions were analysed on whether it would be possible to travel abroad as easily next summer (2021) as it was possible before the coronavirus pandemic. Respondents were asked what they envisioned as their holiday destination for next summer and whether they would agree with having a mandatory mobile phone app which accurately tracks the movements of all Lithuanian citizens. Next, a group of statements was given for the assessment (there is no COVID-19 virus, most likely, there are flaws in the democratic system, but such a system is better than other forms of government - 5 choices in total). The respondents assessed whether Russia, the Belarusian regime and refugees from Asia and Africa are a threat to Lithuania's security. They 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. Continuing on the same topic of tackling the coronavirus pandemic more effectively, there were questions about whether the public would agree to all schools being closed for an academic year until the summer holidays and that pupils would start remote learning; primary school pupils would be taught at school for the academic year until the summer holidays and all other older pupils would be taught remotely; all employees whose work can be done remotely would work from home until the summer; all shops and supermarkets would be closed, leaving only grocery stores open, and, finally, there would be a one-month ban on leaving the house. The survey went on to ask who was more responsible for preventing a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic from happening - the respondents personally or the government. There was a request 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". People were asked whether in Lithuania, they would personally attend a protest, just like the ones that take place in various foreign countries that are against the restrictions on life restraints provided by governments because of the coronavirus epidemic. It went on to assess respondents' trust in scientists, medical professionals and politicians, as well as in the actions of the Skvernelis-led government to control the coronavirus pandemic in Lithuania. They were asked whether they would get vaccinated once the coronavirus vaccine becomes available and had to state the purpose. They were asked whether they had to spend some time in self-isolation because of the pandemic and whether they would defend Lithuania if the nation was at war. At the end of the survey, respondents were given the opportunity to indicate which political party's views they felt were closest to their own. Socio-demographic characteristics: health, average monthly family/household income, employment, gender, size of the place, age, marital status, education, household size, age of children, square metres of the apartment.

本研究旨在探讨立陶宛民众对 COVID-19 大流行及其隔离措施带来的社会后果的观点，特别是聚焦于日常生活实践和民主质量的变革。主要研究问题包括：受访者被询问他们在整体上、更具体地在其当地环境、居住地、立陶宛、欧盟以及全球范围内目前的感受安全感如何；在一系列问题的引导下，他们被要求就其生活的一些方面（生活环境、个人安全等）进行评价（共有5个选项）。他们还被询问在过去12个月内是否感到幸福，立陶宛及其个人生活是否发生了变化。通过几个陈述来探究他们对生活感受的看法（例如，我总是对未来保持乐观——共有3个选项）。受访者被询问他们是否拥有完全的自由选择权，自行决定如何生活，或者在生活中是否几乎没有他们可以依赖的因素，以及是否是人们有责任照顾自己的福祉，还是应由国家负责。他们还被询问在展望未来时，他们是否对个人、亲人、立陶宛的状态以及整个世界的命运感到焦虑。他们被询问世界问题对立陶宛的重要性（共有4个选项）。他们还被询问关于个人感染 COVID-19 风险的感受。受访者被询问冠状病毒大流行何时会结束，以及他们是否同意强制进行冠状病毒疫苗接种。分析了受访者对于是否可能像冠状病毒大流行之前那样，在下一个夏季（2021年）轻松出国旅行的看法。受访者被询问他们想象中的下一个夏季假期目的地，以及他们是否同意强制使用一款能够准确追踪所有立陶宛公民行动的手机应用程序。接下来，给出了一系列陈述以供评估（例如，没有 COVID-19 病毒，很可能是民主制度中存在缺陷，但这样的制度比其他形式的政府更好——共有5个选项）。受访者被评估是否认为俄罗斯、白俄罗斯政权以及亚洲和非洲的难民对立陶宛的安全构成威胁。他们还被询问是否接受通过在所有公共场所安装监控和拍摄设备、禁止立陶宛公民出国旅行、禁止外国人抵达立陶宛、限制新闻自由、允许个人健康数据开放访问等方式更有效地应对冠状病毒大流行。继续探讨更有效地应对冠状病毒大流行的措施，有关于公众是否同意所有学校在学年结束至暑假期间关闭，学生开始远程学习；小学生将在学年结束至暑假期间在学校学习，而所有其他年龄较大的学生将进行远程教学；所有可以远程工作的员工将在家工作直到暑假；所有商店和超市关闭，仅保留杂货店开放，最后，将实施一个月的居家禁令。调查继续询问谁更有责任防止冠状病毒大流行的第二波发生——受访者个人还是政府。有人要求评估“解散议会和选举，拥有一个能够迅速解决任何问题的强大领导者会更好”这一陈述。受访者被询问在立陶宛，他们是否会像在许多外国发生的反对政府因冠状病毒疫情限制生活限制的抗议活动一样，亲自参加抗议。接着，评估了受访者对科学家、医疗专业人士、政治家以及斯克维内利斯领导的政府在立陶宛控制冠状病毒大流行行动中的信任度。他们被询问在冠状病毒疫苗可用时，他们是否会接种疫苗，并说明目的。他们还被询问是否因疫情而不得不进行自我隔离，以及如果国家处于战争状态，他们是否会捍卫立陶宛。在调查的最后，受访者有机会表明他们觉得哪个政党观点与他们的最接近。社会人口统计学特征：健康、平均每月家庭/家庭收入、就业、性别、居住地规模、年龄、婚姻状况、教育、家庭规模、孩子年龄、公寓平方米数。