INSIDE BRIEF: edition 2
State of the Social Welfare in Kazakhstan:
A Public Opinion Snapshot
A Public Opinion Snapshot
July 11, 2025
Report Overview
The “Public Assessment of the Situation in the Social Sphere” was sponsored by the Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan and prepared by the Astana-based Kazakhstan Institute of Public Development – a government-affiliated research and analytical center specializing in studying societal trends, sustainable development, and policy solutions. This report is based on a nationwide survey of 2,400 respondents conducted across all 17 regions and 3 cities of republican significance in Kazakhstan. The survey was completed by July 31, 2023.
Survey Methodology
Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire consisting of six questions. These included:
Demographic profile of respondents
Report Overview
The “Public Assessment of the Situation in the Social Sphere” was sponsored by the Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan and prepared by the Astana-based Kazakhstan Institute of Public Development – a government-affiliated research and analytical center specializing in studying societal trends, sustainable development, and policy solutions. This report is based on a nationwide survey of 2,400 respondents conducted across all 17 regions and 3 cities of republican significance in Kazakhstan. The survey was completed by July 31, 2023.
Survey Methodology
Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire consisting of six questions. These included:
- Rating their satisfaction with 8 aspects of their daily life: family relationships, personal safety, health status, housing conditions, leisure opportunities, financial security, income stability, and working conditions;
- Selecting three primary challenges in healthcare and education from a predefined list of 9–12 options;
- Evaluating the government’s social welfare performance;
- Assessing their financial situation in terms of income and loans.
Demographic profile of respondents
Methodological Limitations
Several limitations of the report were noted by our Editorial team:
This edition of the INSIDE Brief presents selected insights from the report, grouped into three thematic sections, including key statistics and demographic breakdowns. Please note that the report's findings reflect respondents' subjective assessments and opinions on social welfare and issues in Kazakhstan.
Brought to you by Aidana Yerkin and Zhibek Akimova, with contributions from the Editorial Board.
52-page report → 7-minute read
Several limitations of the report were noted by our Editorial team:
- Limited answer choices in some questions may have prevented respondents from fully expressing their views, potentially affecting the depth and accuracy of the results;
- Some questions addressed sensitive topics, which may have influenced respondents’ willingness to answer openly;
- Slight discrepancies are observed in the conversion of figures into percentages and subsequent rounding;
- The analytical report features findings from expert interviews, but provides no information on the experts’ names and qualifications, which undermines the credibility of that section. For this reason, we do not include it in the Brief.
This edition of the INSIDE Brief presents selected insights from the report, grouped into three thematic sections, including key statistics and demographic breakdowns. Please note that the report's findings reflect respondents' subjective assessments and opinions on social welfare and issues in Kazakhstan.
Brought to you by Aidana Yerkin and Zhibek Akimova, with contributions from the Editorial Board.
52-page report → 7-minute read
Satisfaction with Socio-Economic Living Conditions
According to the survey results, the main sources of socio-economic dissatisfaction among Kazakhstanis include a lack of stable income (16.1%), financial insecurity (15.6%), and poor working conditions (14.6%). Notably, struggles with organizing leisure activities (14.6%) rank fourth, surpassing worries related to health or living conditions. Representatives of all age groups are not satisfied with leisure opportunities to a relatively equal extent (from 13.2% to 16.3%).
- Urban residents report higher dissatisfaction than rural residents in nearly all areas – except leisure opportunities, where rural dissatisfaction is 2.2% higher (13.7% vs. 15.9%). The largest gaps in dissatisfaction between urban and rural areas were observed in housing conditions (16.4% vs. 7.5%), personal safety (12.1% vs. 6.6%), and health (15.3% vs. 10%).
To examine public perception of social justice, respondents were asked to select the statement about the state of social justice in the country that, in their view, best reflects reality. As a result, 34.7% believe that government policies aimed at building a social state remain purely rhetorical, 38% say the country is gradually progressing toward it, 17.7% feel that all social conditions are already in place, and 9.6% are undecided.
- Perceptions of social justice are fairly consistent across age and urban/rural divides but vary significantly by region. The majority of respondents in Almaty and Atyrau regions (61 and 62.8%) agree that social policies remain rhetorical, while figures in other regions range from 7.9% to 50.7%. On the other hand, 52.6% of respondents in the North Kazakhstan region believe that all social conditions already exist, with responses from other regions varying from 2.5% to 36.6%.
According to the survey results, the main sources of socio-economic dissatisfaction among Kazakhstanis include a lack of stable income (16.1%), financial insecurity (15.6%), and poor working conditions (14.6%). Notably, struggles with organizing leisure activities (14.6%) rank fourth, surpassing worries related to health or living conditions. Representatives of all age groups are not satisfied with leisure opportunities to a relatively equal extent (from 13.2% to 16.3%).
- Urban residents report higher dissatisfaction than rural residents in nearly all areas – except leisure opportunities, where rural dissatisfaction is 2.2% higher (13.7% vs. 15.9%). The largest gaps in dissatisfaction between urban and rural areas were observed in housing conditions (16.4% vs. 7.5%), personal safety (12.1% vs. 6.6%), and health (15.3% vs. 10%).
To examine public perception of social justice, respondents were asked to select the statement about the state of social justice in the country that, in their view, best reflects reality. As a result, 34.7% believe that government policies aimed at building a social state remain purely rhetorical, 38% say the country is gradually progressing toward it, 17.7% feel that all social conditions are already in place, and 9.6% are undecided.
- Perceptions of social justice are fairly consistent across age and urban/rural divides but vary significantly by region. The majority of respondents in Almaty and Atyrau regions (61 and 62.8%) agree that social policies remain rhetorical, while figures in other regions range from 7.9% to 50.7%. On the other hand, 52.6% of respondents in the North Kazakhstan region believe that all social conditions already exist, with responses from other regions varying from 2.5% to 36.6%.
Financial Security and Loans
Given that material well-being and income stability showed the highest dissatisfaction levels, the data warrant closer attention. Respondents fall into four income groups based on income per household member: up to 70,000 KZT (30.8%), 70,000–180,000 KZT (43.1%), 180,000–280,000 KZT (14.3%), more than 280,000 KZT (7.1%), with 4.8% not reporting their income.
Respondents were given four options to describe their financial situation: (a) having a loan with no difficulties in repayment, (b) having a loan with difficulties in repayment, (c) having a loan that cannot be repaid at all, and (d) not having a loan. The survey revealed that loan dependency is high: around 70% of respondents have loans, and only 30.8% of them report repaying without difficulty.
- When broken down by age, the most indebted group is 29-45 years old (79.6%). No correlation was found between loan repayment ability and age, as the proportion of respondents struggling to repay loans is roughly equal across all groups (6.5–8%). Among those without loans, half (50.5%) are individuals over 61 (retirees).
- Despite the lower average income of rural residents (1.7 times more earners in the lowest income category), overall loan prevalence and repayment difficulties are nearly identical in urban and rural areas: 32.3% and 33.4% face repayment difficulties, while 7% and 7.6%, respectively, are unable to repay their loans.
- Interestingly, financial behavior varies by region:
Given that material well-being and income stability showed the highest dissatisfaction levels, the data warrant closer attention. Respondents fall into four income groups based on income per household member: up to 70,000 KZT (30.8%), 70,000–180,000 KZT (43.1%), 180,000–280,000 KZT (14.3%), more than 280,000 KZT (7.1%), with 4.8% not reporting their income.
Respondents were given four options to describe their financial situation: (a) having a loan with no difficulties in repayment, (b) having a loan with difficulties in repayment, (c) having a loan that cannot be repaid at all, and (d) not having a loan. The survey revealed that loan dependency is high: around 70% of respondents have loans, and only 30.8% of them report repaying without difficulty.
- When broken down by age, the most indebted group is 29-45 years old (79.6%). No correlation was found between loan repayment ability and age, as the proportion of respondents struggling to repay loans is roughly equal across all groups (6.5–8%). Among those without loans, half (50.5%) are individuals over 61 (retirees).
- Despite the lower average income of rural residents (1.7 times more earners in the lowest income category), overall loan prevalence and repayment difficulties are nearly identical in urban and rural areas: 32.3% and 33.4% face repayment difficulties, while 7% and 7.6%, respectively, are unable to repay their loans.
- Interestingly, financial behavior varies by region:
- A higher proportion of respondents from Akmola (44.2%) and West Kazakhstan (46.0%) regions reported having no loans, with figures ranging from 17.1% to 40.2% in other regions.
- Experiencing repayment difficulties is most common in the Kyzylorda region (54.8%), and least common in Mangystau (15.9%) and Akmola (15.4%) regions. Yet, in both of these regions, a significantly higher proportion of people are unable to repay their loans at all (20% and 14.4%, respectively), with the figures for other regions ranging up to 12.6%.
Issues in School Education and Healthcare
Respondents were provided with lists of 9 issues in school education and 12 issues in healthcare and asked to select the top three they face most often (or suggest their own). Note that the survey section on education was completed by only 44.9% of the participants, those who have school-aged children, which affects the sample’s geographical distribution.
The general trend is that among listed issues, parents are primarily concerned with poor school infrastructure (36.4%), declining student performance (34.7%), and low-quality textbooks (30.2%). The least frequently mentioned problems include school fundraising (13.5%) and school safety (10.7%).
- Urban and rural respondents prioritised different problems. Rural parents were most worried about weak infrastructure (42.8%). Urban parents, however, highlighted the declining quality of knowledge and skills received by students (35.1%) and the poor quality of textbooks (32%). Concerns about psychological support, unequal opportunities, and school safety are shared fairly evenly across both groups.
- Interestingly, while no consistency is observed in the ranking of school education issues across different regions, opinions on healthcare are more unified nationwide. The top two concerns – expensive medications (61.3%) and high costs of private medical services (44.4%) – are shared in 17 out of 20 regions.
- Certain concerns in healthcare varied notably between rural and urban residents. People living in rural areas are more concerned with the lack of pharmacies near their homes (21% vs. 7.1%), the high cost of medications (65% vs. 59.1%), and the absence of proper medical equipment in local clinics (23.8% vs. 18.3%). In contrast, urban residents more often pointed to the low qualifications of healthcare workers (29.4% vs. 21.6%) and the perceived indifference of medical staff (16.1% vs. 11.2%) as key issues.
Respondents were provided with lists of 9 issues in school education and 12 issues in healthcare and asked to select the top three they face most often (or suggest their own). Note that the survey section on education was completed by only 44.9% of the participants, those who have school-aged children, which affects the sample’s geographical distribution.
The general trend is that among listed issues, parents are primarily concerned with poor school infrastructure (36.4%), declining student performance (34.7%), and low-quality textbooks (30.2%). The least frequently mentioned problems include school fundraising (13.5%) and school safety (10.7%).
- Urban and rural respondents prioritised different problems. Rural parents were most worried about weak infrastructure (42.8%). Urban parents, however, highlighted the declining quality of knowledge and skills received by students (35.1%) and the poor quality of textbooks (32%). Concerns about psychological support, unequal opportunities, and school safety are shared fairly evenly across both groups.
- Interestingly, while no consistency is observed in the ranking of school education issues across different regions, opinions on healthcare are more unified nationwide. The top two concerns – expensive medications (61.3%) and high costs of private medical services (44.4%) – are shared in 17 out of 20 regions.
- Certain concerns in healthcare varied notably between rural and urban residents. People living in rural areas are more concerned with the lack of pharmacies near their homes (21% vs. 7.1%), the high cost of medications (65% vs. 59.1%), and the absence of proper medical equipment in local clinics (23.8% vs. 18.3%). In contrast, urban residents more often pointed to the low qualifications of healthcare workers (29.4% vs. 21.6%) and the perceived indifference of medical staff (16.1% vs. 11.2%) as key issues.
Conclusion
This survey identified a clear gap between rural and urban residents in areas such as housing conditions, personal safety, and healthcare access, particularly in infrastructure and medical equipment. However, no significant gap emerged between rural and urban respondents in terms of loan dependency or the overall perception of social justice.
The survey found significant variation among regions in loan repayment ability, with some regions reporting higher loan-free rates, while others higher rates of inability to repay. However, given methodological limitations, this variation must be interpreted with caution.
Overall, income instability and financial insecurity stand out as the two most common concerns for the Kazakhstani population, and only 17.7% of Kazakhstani citizens perceive that social justice has been achieved.
This survey identified a clear gap between rural and urban residents in areas such as housing conditions, personal safety, and healthcare access, particularly in infrastructure and medical equipment. However, no significant gap emerged between rural and urban respondents in terms of loan dependency or the overall perception of social justice.
The survey found significant variation among regions in loan repayment ability, with some regions reporting higher loan-free rates, while others higher rates of inability to repay. However, given methodological limitations, this variation must be interpreted with caution.
Overall, income instability and financial insecurity stand out as the two most common concerns for the Kazakhstani population, and only 17.7% of Kazakhstani citizens perceive that social justice has been achieved.
