Tag Archives: CaucasusBarometer

01 Feb

Tweet tweet – թռչուն, quş, ფრინველის, птица – social media in the Caucasus

twitterfb

With all of the Twitter analysis I’ve been doing lately, I’ve been seriously thinking about social media use in the Caucasus.

We know that a larger percentage of Georgians and Armenians are online than Azerbaijanis (2011 stats – I’ve seen the 2012 stats and this pattern continues) and weekly or more often adult Internet users are 30% of Armenians, 28% of Georgians, and 13% of Azerbaijanis (2011).

Armenia has 3,100,236 people, Azerbaijan 9,168,000 people, and Georgia 4,486,000 people – but that’s total population, we need to look at just adults (since that’s the data we have about Internet use – I fully acknowledge that teenagers are online and may be using social media). According to the World Bank, 20% of Armenians, 21% of Azerbaijanis, and 17% of Georgians are ages 0-14.

So, let’s take them out of the equation – (that’s 620,047 Armenians, 1,925,280 Azerbaijanis, and 762,620 Georgians) – and you have “adult” populations of 2,480,189 AM, 7,242,720 AZ, and 3,723,380 GE. So raw weekly or daily Internet users would be:

744,057 Armenia
941,554 Azerbaijan
1,042,546 Georgia

So in raw numbers, although the largest proportion of frequent Internet users exists in Armenia, Georgia has the largest sheer number of frequent Internet users.

In 2011, 6% of Armenians, 7% of Azerbaijanis, and 9% of Georgians (ADULTS) were on Facebook (let’s leave Odnoklassniki out of this for now). There is no Twitter data. I’ve seen 2012 and there is some growth, but not substantial. (And yes, I know socialbakers.com exists, but I really don’t trust it.)

Raw numbers then would be:

148,811 Armenia
506,990 Azerbaijan
335,104 Georgia

—

Okay, so back to my original point — I’ve noticed that the Azerbaijani Facebook and Twitter worlds is substantially more active than the Armenian one. (I acknowledge that I’m not up on what is going on in Georgia, but for reasons explained below, you’ll see that it is probably similar to Armenia). Why is this?

1. The raw numbers noted above — almost 5 times as many Azerbaijanis are on Facebook than Armenians. (I’m going to leave these countries’ diasporas out of this, but for what it’s worth, I feel like the Azerbaijani diaspora engages with Republic of Azerbaijan citizens more than Armenian diaspora do with Republic of Armenia citizens).
2. Because of the lack of free expression and assembly in Azerbaijan, most political discussion takes place on Facebook. Armenians can do this fairly freely in cafes or homes. Similarly, Armenians can organize and be political active in ways that Azerbaijanis cannot.
3. Language is a big part of this. As I wrote earlier this week, users of the Azerbaijani language are at a serious advantage over users of Armenian or Georgian because Azerbaijani uses the Latin script. This is also a special concern when it comes to Twitter and even more so when it comes to mobile phones (only the most recent Android OS has Armenian and Georgian, iPhone has it, but the others? No way). But my overall point is that there are barriers to Armenians and Georgians using these sites.
4. This is entirely speculative, but I get the sense that Bakuvians are just way more wired than Yerevantsis are. The Baku social media scene, beyond politics, is always jumpin’! There are a ton of Azerbaijani Instagrammers, Pinteresters, and other social media platform users. I just don’t see that same sort of scene in Yerevan. Yes, there is a bit of a FourSquare scene and of course people use these social media sites, but not to the extent that I see in Azerbaijan. (Although this may be a result of the sheer numbers!!)

I’m sure there are other reasons, and I’d love to hear comments…

30 Jan

Foreign language learning in the Caucasus

I am so impressed with the linguistic abilities of my Caucasus friends. Growing up in a culture where bilingualism is uncommon, I am so envious of all the languages spoken by these friends.

I have a piece in progress right now that looks at the influence of English language proficiency on Internet use in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Because of that I’ve been thinking about languages a lot.

Now, 2 decades after the Soviet Union collapsed, language attitudes are sort of all over the place. Here is some self-plagiarism (from the article mentioned above):

Language plays an important identity role in post-Soviet societies (Kleshik, 2010).  In the Soviet period, the Caucasus were unique in that their national languages were considered official languages and government materials, media, and education were provided in both Russian and the local languages (Pavlenko, 2008).  However, while Russian never became the dominant language in the Caucasus, high fluency in Russian was necessary for one to get ahead in the non-Russian Soviet republics.  Urban families were able to choose to send their children to national or Russian language schools, and Russian schools generally were of better quality with newer textbooks.  Traditionally the second language of choice would have been Russian (during the tsarist and Soviet periods); however, today, more and more young people are opting to learn English as well.
Armenian. Armenian is an Indo-European language with no strong relationship with other languages (Comrie, 1987) and a unique script dating to the fifth century.  The script has not been well supported in computer operating systems, nor did a single encoding system dominate early computer use.  It is very common, especially on mobile phones, for Armenian to be written in Latin script, developing into an informal orthography.  Five to six million people speak Armenian (Grimes, 1992), although it is difficult to determine the number that can read and write, because for many speakers Armenian is a heritage language spoken in the household while the language of education and work is another language.  Many families live in bi- or trilingual households and children are raised multilingual from birth (Petrossian, 1997).
Azerbaijani. Azerbaijani is closely related to Turkish.  As Azerbaijani people lived under various empires, competing scripts (Perso-Arabic, Latin, Cyrillic) were used over different periods.  In particular, during the Soviet period, Azerbaijanis in the Republic of Azerbaijan used Cyrillic, while Azerbaijanis in Iran used Perso-Arabic.  After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan decided to use the Turkish Latin script, although certainly older Azerbaijanis continue to use the script in which they were educated, Cyrillic.  The move to the Turkish Latin alphabet benefits Azerbaijanis because there is no need for a special encoding script on personal computers or mobile phones (although ç becomes “c,”  ı  becomes “i”, ə because “e” or “a,” but in the context of a sentence, the replacement letter makes sense).  There are likely about 20 million Azerbaijani speakers in the world.  However, like Armenians, heritage speakers as well as the different scripts used mean that it is challenging for Azerbaijanis to communicate with each other via text.
Georgian. Georgian is a complex language that is part of the Kartvelian language family, unrelated to any other language.  Like Armenian, Georgian has a unique script that has been a barrier for using technology, although writing Georgian in Latin script is not an uncommon workaround.  Between 4-5 million people speak Georgian, but with some heritage speakers, it is unknown how many are literate.
Russian Language Skill.  In the Soviet era, the Armenian language assumed a hegemonic function compared to many other republics because of a strong national intelligentsia (Suny, 1994).  Russian remains the most popular second language and a great deal of Russian language media is present to this day.  Between 74-87% of Armenians surveyed each year in 2006-2010 said that it is very important for Armenian children to learn Russian, and an additional 11-20% said that it is somewhat important (Gallup Organization, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010).
In Azerbaijan in the post-Soviet period, the government “demoted” Russian (banned in media and advertising in 2007) and promoted Turkish.  Recently, English has become a popular second language choice as well (Shafiyeva & Kennedy, 2010).  Nonetheless, Russian language instruction is still popular in Azerbaijan (Marquardt, 2011).   Between 35-49% of Azerbaijanis surveyed each year in 2006-2010 said that it is very important for Azerbaijani children to learn Russian, and an additional 39-50% said that it is somewhat important (Gallup Organization, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010).
In Georgia during the Soviet era, the Georgian language remained a strong part of public life, although Russian was still considered an elite language.  In 1970, most rural Georgians (91.4%) and over half of urban Georgians (63%) had low proficiency in Russian (Suny, 1994).  In the post-Soviet period, because of Georgia’s poor relationship with Russia, the Russian language has been strongly discouraged at the governmental level (banned in advertising and media in 2004), although citizens still believe that it is a useful language to know (Kleshik, 2010).  Between 43-69% of Georgians surveyed each year in 2006-2010 said that it is very important for Georgian children to learn Russian, and an additional 27-40% said that it is somewhat important (Gallup Organization, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010).
English. Based on the author’s observations, English language learning seems to have become more popular in these countries since the 1990s.  At least in Azerbaijan, others confirm that English has become a popular second language choice (Shafiyeva & Kennedy, 2010).  But English language education is not available to all.  Urbanites and the rich have greater access to schools with English language instruction as well as private tutoring that would allow someone to reach a higher level of proficiency (Pearce, 2011).

—-

So, with that, I wanted to look at attitudes toward foreign language instruction. In the 2011 Caucasus Barometer, people were asked if any foreign language should be mandatory in school (none, any, Russian, English, and other were the choices — I wish this had been open ended, but whatever… The lack of Turkish as a choice for Azerbaijan bothers me the most).

Let’s be honest – Armenian and Georgian especially are not the most practical languages to know, in terms of global opportunities. Because of this, I speculated that more upwardly mobile people would be more keen on foreign language instruction.

 

arm1 az1 ge1

These graphics were created by Katy Pearce based on her analysis of the 2011 Caucasus Barometer. Any questions should be directed to @katypearce on Twitter.
This is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at www.katypearce.net. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.katypearce.net/cv/info.

30 Jan

What is a good citizen (in the Caucasus)? 2011

For a variety of reasons, I’ve been thinking about what it means to be a good citizen in the Caucasus. With the growing differences between Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan (differences culturally, politically, etc.), I was wondering how people view themselves vis-a-vis their country.

And lo-and-behold, there were major differences (all noted here are statistically significant).

(This is all based on the 2011 Caucasus Barometer)

11

Takeaway: Caucasus citizens believe in forming their own opinions. (And if you’re ever been at a dinner in the Caucasus, you’d probably agree. ;))

21

Takeaway: Caucasian citizens like following the law. (There might be some social desirability effect here.)

31

Takeaway: Georgians are pretty cool with the idea that they don’t always have to support their government. No surprise here. Armenians and Azerbaijanis though? Not so much. While it isn’t through the roof,  this is a pretty large chunk of supporters. This is worth further analysis.

13

Takeaway: Once again, Georgians are the most keen on being critical toward the government. Azerbaijanis are the least (no shock here).

Azerbaijan’s been on my mind a lot lately and with Azerbaijan, perhaps even more than with Armenia or Georgia, rural/urban differences are exceptionally important to acknowledge. So I ran a second analysis on differences on these topics between capital / regional cities/ rural.

61

Takeaway: Urban people are fond of forming one’s own opinion. Maybe this is a reflection of the autonomy that regional urban city residents have from the goings-on in Baku? But rural people being more independently minded than Bakuvians? Not sure on this one — maybe people that are part of the system?

71

Takeaway: Rural people are least inclined to believe supporting the government is important? Interesting! I need to think on this one.

111

Takeaway, Bakuvians are most critical, urban the least. Need to think on this one as well.

 

These graphics were created by Katy Pearce based on her analysis of the 2011 Caucasus Barometer. Any questions should be directed to @katypearce on Twitter.
This is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at www.katypearce.net. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.katypearce.net/cv/info.

15 Jan

Qualities in boy and girl children in the Caucasus – window into cultural differences?

Fairly regularly people ask me how the Caucasus countries are similar and different. For the most part the 3 countries share a lot. But there are some meaningful differences, to me, qualitatively.

But one way to look at this is to think about how people raise their children. I don’t have any literature on this, but I *imagine* that there is a pretty solid argument that values passed onto children is a strong reflection of cultural values.

As such, from the 2007 Caucasus Barometer…

Independence
Hard work
Feeling of responsibility
Imagination
Tolerance/respect
Thrift
Determination/perseverance
Religious faith
Unselfishness
Obedience
Modesty

were the choices given to participants (adults in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia) and they were asked “which of these qualities should be encouraged in boy/girl children?” and they could choose multiple ones.

gener

In all countries and across both genders, hard work was the most popular quality. Feeling of responsibility was also rated pretty highly.

Looking at this overall, there were a few interesting blips.

Starting at the top, Armenians were much less likely to want to encourage independence in boy children. This was also the case for girl children (although, notably, girls were much less likely to be encouraged to be independent than boys in all the countries.)

Azerbaijanis were much more likely than Armenians or Georgians to encourage imagination in their children. It is also possible that the way that the word imagination was translated could have impacted this. Of all of these, I think that it is the vaguest term.

Armenians are much more likely to teach their children tolerance. Let’s all think of this for a bit.

Determination was fairly popular trait for boys, but Armenians were much more likely to pick this than Azerbaijanis or Georgians.

Georgians, unsurprisingly, were the most religious.

Now, obedience and modesty – these are key issues for Caucasus girls. And in all countries, this was emphasized for girls much more than boys. Armenian in particular had a very high rating for these. I would suggest, however, that translation could have come into play. There are some ways to translate “modesty” that imply sexuality, for example.

But all, in all, I think that this does say something about the similarities and differences between these countries.

23 Nov

I Got 99 Problems, But Statistical Triangulation Ain’t One

I often have conversations with people about Internet penetration rates.

The point I’d like to make is that these statistics are complicated and it is hard to get at the “right” number. That’s why we try to triangulate — look at different sources of data to see if things seem right. We also should always assess the credibility of the source of the data.

For this example I chose mobile phone penetration.

Data sources:

ITU is the UN’s official statistics and these numbers come from the governments themselves who usually get the numbers from the telecommunications companies. These companies count number of SIM cards sold and it is not unusual for people to have multiple SIM cards. This is data to be highly skeptical about.

Caucasus Barometer, Gallup, and EBRD are surveys taken face-to-face in households. All use different sampling techniques and are collected by different organizations. None are perfect, but they’re as good as we’ve got. Of the three, I trust Gallup the least.

Noteworthy:
All of these were collected at different times of the year.

Margin of error varies in all of these.

A ~4-6 point difference is within the margin of error and shouldn’t be looked at with too much suspicion.

So what do we see?

– Look at the huge difference between the ITU and the Caucasus Barometer in all three countries in 2004.
– 2006 is a little better, but Georgia’s a little too far off to be left to chance.
– 2007 is a little questionable in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
– 2008 is really off in Armenia and not great in Azerbaijan.
– 2009 isn’t bad.
– 2010 is all over the place. My thought is that by the time you’d are at more than three-quarters of households having phones, the ones that don’t are also probably the ones that are less likely be be surveyed – the poorest of the poor, for example.
– The 2011 difference between the CB and the ITU is likely due to SIM counting. While a household may own a phone, they may have a lot of SIMs too.

16 Nov

Tech inequality in Georgia

Link to full document.

While politicians love to cite percentage of Internet users as a meaningful metric for Internet development, this may not be the case. In this example from late 2011 in Georgia, we use that the sociodemographic differences between those that do not know what the Internet is, those who never use the Internet, and those that use the Internet daily are stark.
Moreover, there are tremendous differences between what daily Internet users are doing online and what those that infrequently access are doing.
Capital-enhancing activities like reading blogs, reading news, or searching for information are much more likely when the user is online daily.
So what are these weekly and monthly Internet users doing? NOT MUCH.

Thus, be skeptical when you read or hear about X% of people in a country are online. That may include the old man who got online at an Internet cafe once 4 years ago. It might include the woman who only uses the Internet when her son opens Skype for her on a holiday to speak with distant family.
These individuals are not experiencing the benefits of the Internet that the daily users are. And given that those with daily access tend to be those already advantaged in Georgian society, the Internet may contribute to greater inequality as those with resources continue to gain access to more resources: a Matthew Effect.

16 Nov

Technology Inequality in Azerbaijan

Link to full document.

While politicians love to cite percentage of Internet users as a meaningful metric for Internet development, this may not be the case. In this example from late 2011 in Azerbaijan, we use that the sociodemographic differences between those that do not know what the Internet is, those who never use the Internet, and those that use the Internet daily are stark.
What are Azerbaijani Internet users doing? If around half of daily users are noting these popular activities, where are the other half going?

Thus, be skeptical when you read or hear about X% of people in a country are online. That may include the old man who got online at an Internet cafe once 4 years ago. It might include the woman who only uses the Internet when her son opens Skype for her on a holiday to speak with distant family.

Azerbaijan is still in the early adopter stage of Internet diffusion. Thus it is unsurprising that elites are doing elite things online. As time goes on and more Azerbaijanis get online, it will be interesting to see what activities they engage in. If Azerbaijani later adopters are anything like those in Armenia and Georgia, we’ll see a tremendous gap between what elites are doing online and what everyone else does.

15 Nov

Technology Inequality in Armenia

Link to full version.

While politicians love to cite percentage of Internet users as a meaningful metric for Internet development, this may not be the case. In this example from late 2011 in Armenia, we use that the sociodemographic differences between those that do not know what the Internet is, those who never use the Internet, and those that use the Internet daily are stark.
Moreover, there are tremendous differences between what daily Internet users are doing online and what those that infrequently access are doing.
Capital-enhancing activities like reading blogs, reading news, or searching for information are much more likely when the user is online daily.
So what are these weekly and monthly Internet users doing? NOT MUCH.

Thus, be skeptical when you read or hear about X% of people in a country are online. That may include the old man who got online at an Internet cafe once 4 years ago. It might include the woman who only uses the Internet when her son opens Skype for her on a holiday to speak with distant family.
These individuals are not experiencing the benefits of the Internet that the daily users are. And given that those with daily access tend to be those already advantaged in Armenian society, the Internet may contribute to greater inequality as those with resources continue to gain access to more resources: a Matthew Effect.