Ukrainians trust one another more than their authorities

Додайте Humanitarian Media Hub в обране в Google

Слідкуйте за останніми новинами гуманітарної сфери

Social cohesion in Ukraine, four years into the full-scale war, holds together on trust between neighbours, while trust in local authorities slips. That is the picture drawn by a thematic brief from the International Organization for Migration (IOM), based on the 23rd round of its General Population Survey. The study was carried out between 12 January and 30 March 2026 among 40,004 respondents in territories under the control of the Government of Ukraine. As of March 2026, 3.9 million people remained internally displaced, and another 4.2 million had returned to their places of origin.

Two dimensions of social cohesion

Researchers distinguish horizontal cohesion — the relations among citizens themselves — from vertical cohesion, meaning the relationship between people and the state. That distinction explains the study’s central contrast: the first holds, the second weakens.

Read also: 
Humanitarian Medicine Funding in Ukraine Drops to 49% in 2026

Trust between people holds

In government-controlled areas, 89% of returnees and non-displaced residents viewed the arrival of IDPs positively, while only 2% held negative views. Toward those returning from abroad, 87% were favourable. The warmest reception came from people who had themselves been displaced: among them, positive attitudes reached 92%. “A personal experience of forced displacement likely fostered greater understanding of and empathy for people in a similar situation,” the brief states. Young people are the exception: 79% of those aged 18–24 were favourable, and among young men in that group the figure fell to 74%.

Neighbours were trusted by 69% of respondents, and only 7% did not trust them at all. “Overall, trust in people within the community was higher than trust in institutions,” the authors conclude. Specialised institutions were trusted by 67%, international and non-governmental organisations by 49%, and local authorities by 48%. Among those living solely on social payments, 19% did not trust their neighbours at all, against 7% for the population overall.

Discrimination rises the longer displacement lasts

Among IDPs, 26% reported experiencing unfair treatment because they were not local residents — a year earlier the figure stood at 19%. Among returnees, 16% reported discrimination, against a previous 13%. “Manifestations of discrimination are an early-warning signal of rising tension between communities, since changes in people’s behaviour can usually precede changes in their attitudes,” the document notes.

Nearly half of the IDPs who encountered discrimination (49%) experienced it during interactions with local residents, and a further 27% at the hands of local authorities. Time in displacement deepened the problem: discrimination was reported by 27% of IDPs away from home for a year or more, and by 28% of those displaced for over two years, against 20% among those displaced for less than a year. The highest figures were among people who returned from abroad (23%), single-parent IDP households (38%), and IDPs in the city of Kyiv (37%) and Lviv oblast (37%).

The most vulnerable feel least at home

Sense of belonging was measured on a scale from zero to ten. Zero was chosen by 14% of respondents, while 38% rated their belonging at 8–10. In a single quarter the share feeling no belonging at all rose from 11% to 14%, and the share with a strong sense fell from 45% to 38%. The steepest decline came among the non-displaced population, from 47% to 37%.

“The people who feel least a part of their community are often also the hardest to reach,” the authors caution. The highest share of those who felt no part of their community at all was recorded among veterans (27%) and people with disabilities living alone (26%), followed by single older people (22%), those whose sole source of income is a pension (21%), and people who returned from abroad (18%).

The space for participation stays narrow

Only 38% of the population were engaged in at least one local decision-making process, while 55% took almost no part or none at all. In matters of sport and culture, 80% stood aside, in education 75%, in housing 72%, and in utilities 70%. IDPs were the least engaged (58% took part in no process).

Indifference explains that gap poorly: only 4% had never tried to take part, while 28% wanted to but ran into obstacles — chiefly a lack of time (34%) and the absence of accessible platforms for participation (30%). “The low level of civic participation is likely driven not so much by a lack of interest among the population as by an insufficient number of accessible opportunities to participate,” the brief sums up. Young people proved the most detached: 62% of those aged 18–24 barely took part in decisions.

Trust in local authorities remains low

“The vertical dimension of social cohesion — that is, trust between people and the institutions that govern and provide services to the population — remained weak,” the document states. Local authorities were trusted by 48% of the population, and over the year the figure even slipped slightly, from 50% at the end of 2024. Local authorities also carried the largest share of people who did not trust them at all, at 22%.

The lowest trust was recorded in the southern macro-region, where 31% did not trust local authorities at all. Kyiv stood apart: the share expressing high trust was the lowest of any region there, at just 10%. Decentralisation was still taking shape when the full-scale war interrupted its progress.

Those weighing a move stand out on every measure

About 4% of the population were considering leaving within the next three months, and 7% among IDPs. On every dimension of cohesion these people looked weaker: 26% felt no belonging at all, against 14% among those planning to stay, and 34% reported complete distrust of the authorities, against 22%. “Declining trust, a weakening sense of belonging to the community and rising social tension often appear before people make a decision to leave,” the authors explain the indicator’s logic.

Reintegration is hardest for those who returned from abroad

Returnees on the whole showed the strongest results: 43% rated belonging at 8–10, and 53% trusted local authorities. Yet those who returned from abroad trailed those who returned from other regions of Ukraine: a complete absence of belonging was reported by 18% against 12%, and discrimination by 23% against 14%. Among those who returned within the past year, 27% did not trust local authorities at all, against 18% among those who returned earlier. “Support for returnees is especially important during the first year after returning from displacement, when trust in local authorities is at its lowest,” the brief stresses.

Economic pressure hits cohesion unevenly

Households that resorted to no coping strategies showed strong results: only 6% felt no part of their community, and 60% trusted local authorities. Those who had exhausted eight or more strategies contrasted sharply: 25% felt no belonging at all, and only 34% trusted the authorities. The source of income mattered more than its size: among households with irregular incomes, only 41% trusted local authorities. “Economic security and social cohesion are likely interconnected, yet the consequences of economic hardship manifest differently,” the document concludes.

The same people at the bottom of every measure

The same groups run through all eight findings: people with disabilities, veterans, single older people and pensioners, single-parent IDP households, those who returned from abroad or recently, and families under the greatest economic pressure. “These same groups recurred across all the study’s results, because they were united by various combinations of shared vulnerability factors,” the authors explain. The IOM advises focusing on rebuilding trust in local institutions, combining income support with cohesion measures, and concentrating assistance in the first year after a change in life circumstances.

Read also: 
The 2026 winter aid programme will cover 2.1 million Ukrainians in frontline regions and towns