Multilevel Trust in Humanitarian Organisations in Ukraine

Trust is widely recognised as a precondition for effective humanitarian action, yet little empirical work examines whom crisis-affected people in Ukraine trust, why, and with what consequences for access and programme design. This thesis maps beneficiaries’ trust across actor types and identifies the factors that strengthen or erode it, interpreting results through a multilevel lens of relational, institutional, and generalised trust. A convergent mixed-methods design combined a computer-assisted self-administered (CASI) survey (n=150; April–May 2025) with five semi-structured interviews with intermediary practitioners (R1–R5) in Poltava Oblast who observe beneficiary behaviour at distribution points and municipal offices. Survey data provide breadth on baseline trust and factor salience; interviews supply depth on mechanisms and context. Integration proceeds through triangulated interpretation. Findings show high baseline support for “humanitarians” as a category (84.4% answered yes to “should humanitarians be trusted?”), but trust becomes selective when specific actors are named: international NGOs attract the most consolidated confidence (61.3% rating 4–5/5), national NGOs sit in the middle, while local NGOs and governmental actors receive more neutral or fragmented ratings. Across methods, transparency dominates as a trust-builder by a wide margin; corruption/embezzlement, broken commitments, and opaque processes are leading drivers of distrust. Identity-linked cues—especially language use and perceived stance toward the war—operate as relational signals of respect or misalignment. Interviews highlight additional dynamics: barriers to access (cost/distance, digital literacy), local-level politicisation that contaminates perceptions of NGOs, the importance of needs-based adaptation, and the risk of aid dependency in frontline communities. The thesis argues that multilevel action is needed to achieve durable trust in Ukraine: institutional signals (clear rules, visible reporting, fair targeting) must be paired with relational practice (predictable presence, respectful communication, rapid feedback loops). Recommendations translate this into programme adaptations for international and local actors and inform localisation strategies that rebalance roles without sacrificing accountability.