Local Stakeholders and Ukraine’s Resilience: A Survey of Community-Level Engagement During the War
View the full report.
Summary
The activities of civil society and local stakeholder engagement in Ukraine’s communities have been decisive in ensuring societal resilience and the positive impact of international assistance in the country. In the context of overlapping crises—including the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s full-scale invasion, economic recession, outward migration, and internal displacement—local actors have been vital. But they are also constrained by the increasing centralization of power. A better understanding of how civic actors cooperate with other stakeholders at the local level during the war is key to strengthening Ukraine’s democracy and advancing its long-term recovery.
The German Marshall Fund of the United States and Institute Respublica conducted a comprehensive expert survey about the engagement and capabilities of various local stakeholders in Ukraine. This focused on 18 localities of different sizes and in different regions, including rural communities, administrative hubs, economic hubs, and conflict-affected communities. The stakeholders that were the object of the survey are civil society, local public authorities and the central government, local and national media, the private sector, and international organizations.
Civil society is judged to be the stakeholder most engaged and interested in local affairs, and its influence is rated positively, but only a small minority say this influence is very large. Local public authorities and the private sector are seen as more influential and more capable of mobilizing resources effectively. International organizations are viewed as interested in local affairs but lacking influence. National media receive lower scores on interest and influence.
A relatively small minority of respondents say their community was prepared for the war, but there is also a strong recognition of the agility and adaptability of communities in dealing with its impacts. Civil society is the most positively rated stakeholder for agility and ability to overcome challenges, followed by the private sector. Local public authorities and the central government are seen as slower to react but more capable of having an impact in communities.
Civil society is also seen as the stakeholder with the highest level of organizational and human-resources capacity. However, its financial capacity is rated considerably lower. This limits civil society’s long-term sustainability. By contrast, local public authorities and the private sector are rated highly for financial and human resources capacity but moderately for organizational strength.
Resilience should be conceptualized beyond crisis response. It should encompass preparedness, agility, robustness, and societal impact. Ukraine’s civil society and private sector have performed strongly across these dimensions, showing they play a crucial role in local recovery and democratic resilience.
Effective cooperation between local stakeholders is a key factor in resilience. The quality of cooperation is rated highest between civil society and the private sector and between local public authorities and the central government. Cooperation between civil society and the central government is rated lowest; this reflects that it is hampered by limited transparency, centralization, and fragmented civic representation.
There have been many examples of local collaboration in emergency response, rebuilding infrastructure, and providing social-support services. However, most of these efforts remain informal and dependent on personal networks rather than institutionalized mechanisms.
International organizations are often seen as neutral facilitators. While they play an important role in funding and technical assistance, their limited local and long-term presence as well as their focus on niche groups does not help the building of broad coalitions.
Despite the importance of inclusive planning, stakeholders’ awareness and participation in the National Recovery Plan remain low. Large majorities say they had not heard of it nor been involved in its development. The process remains largely top-down, with the central government playing the dominant role. In contrast, stakeholders report higher awareness of and involvement in local community strategies. However, the implementation of these is impeded by capacity limitations at the local level. Effective and accountable investment planning must include early-stage stakeholder participation, especially in the evolving reconstruction framework.
Stakeholders see transparency and the quality of public services as the top priorities for their community, followed by safety and security, accountability, and civic engagement. Despite the scale and impact of the war destruction caused by Russia, physical infrastructure and housing rank lower in priority for stakeholders, except in some conflict-affected communities. This suggests a strong societal emphasis on governance quality and inclusive decision-making.
Ukraine’s local stakeholders, especially civil society and the private sector, have shown remarkable agility and resilience during wartime. However, their long-term effectiveness depends on improving cooperation with public authorities and reducing over-centralization. Developing a structured mechanism for stakeholder collaboration, fostering trust, and building capacity at the local level will be essential for a sustainable recovery.
It is crucial that the EU and other international donors structure their funding to allow direct access for local actors, and that they promote inclusive planning processes and community engagement. International support should aim at reinforcing inclusive civic participation in public policy processes, and also at improving cooperation and dialogue between civil society and the relevant national and local authorities. More importantly, donor funding should support directly engagement between citizens, local civil society, and local public authorities to improve the quality of policymaking so that it fits better people’s needs and fosters vibrant debates on issues affecting everyday life and the future of the country, building democratic society. This will help align recovery efforts with community needs and mitigate the risk of corruption, clientelism, and governance disconnects.
Ultimately, Ukraine’s resilience is a whole-of-society endeavor. Continuing to invest in a civil society that is active at the local level is crucial for accountability in decision-making processes and local development in the country’s communities. Empowering local actors through collaboration, transparency, and capacity-building will strengthen Ukraine’s democratic governance and recovery.