Standard Eurobarometer 94 Public opinion in the European Union

Standard Eurobarometer 94 Winter 2020 - 2021

Public opinion in the European Union

First results Fieldwork: February-March 2021

This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission. The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.

Project title Standard Eurobarometer 94- Winter 2020 – 2021

Public opinion in the European Union, First results

Language version EN

Catalogue number NA-AO-21-001-EN-N

ISBN 978-92-76-35884-8

ISSN 1977-3927

10.2775/822120

© European Union, 2021

https://www.europa.eu/eurobarometer

Photo credit: Getty Images



TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 4

I. EUROPEANS AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS 8 1. Trust in national governments and parliaments and in the European Union: trend 9 2. Trust in the European Union: national results and evolutions 10 3. The image of the European Union: trend 11 4. The image of the European Union: evolutions and national results 12

II. THE ECONOMIC SITUATION 13 1. Current situation of the economy at national level: trend, national results and evolution 14 2. Support for the Euro: trend and national results 17

III. THE MAIN CONCERNS OF EUROPEANS 19 1. Main concerns at European level: trend 20 2. Main concerns at European level: national results 21 3. Main concerns at national level: trend 23 4. Main concerns at national level: national results 24

IV. THE EU AND THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC 26 1. Satisfaction with the measures to fight the crisis: trend and national results 27 2. Trust in the EU to make the right decisions in the future: trend and national results 29 3. EU priorities in its response to the coronavirus pandemic 30 4. Economic consequences: national results 33 5. The EU recovery plan ‘Next generation EU’: national results 34 6. Personal experience of the coronavirus pandemic: trend and national results 35

V. ATTITUDES TOWARDS VACCINATION AGAINST COVID-19 36 1. Interest in getting vaccinated against Covid-19: national results 37 2. Attitudes to Covid-19 vaccines: EU results 38 3. Information on Covid-19 vaccines: EU results 39

CONCLUSION 40

INTRODUCTION


5

This report presents the first results of the Standard Eurobarometer survey of winter 2020-2021 (EB94), which was carried out between 12 February and 11 March 2021 in the 27 EU Member States. The survey was also conducted in 12 other countries or territories: five candidate countries (Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey), the Turkish Cypriot Community in the part of the country that is not controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus, as well as in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Kosovo1, Norway, Switzerland and in the United Kingdom.

This First results report is published together with the results of the Standard Eurobarometer questions, which are set out in an annex. It focuses on the results obtained in the 27 EU Member States.

Coronavirus pandemic

The period between the previous Standard Eurobarometer (EB93, summer 2020) and the fieldwork of the current Standard Eurobarometer survey of winter 2020-2021, conducted in February-March 2021 was marked by the prolongation and deepening of the coronavirus global pandemic: the “second wave” of the pandemic started in autumn 20202, after a relative improvement of the sanitary situation in summer 2020. At the beginning of 2021, the appearance of the different variants of the virus – “British”, “South African” and “Brazilian” in particular, their greater contagiousness, and their presumed stronger resistance to antibodies3 plunged several European countries into a “third wave”, with the implementation of a series of restriction measures.

On 24 March, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) reported more than 24.1 million cases in the European Union, with the highest caseloads in France (4,071,662), Italy (3,223,142) and Spain (3,195,062). Worldwide infections were over 120.2 million and continued to rise.4 At that date, there have also been more than 577,300 deaths in the European Union and more than 2.6 million deaths worldwide.

Vaccination campaign

The vaccine campaign, which started at the end of 2020 in the European Union, has recently gained momentum. Following the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) positive assessment of their safety and efficacy, the European Commission has so far given four conditional marketing authorisations for the vaccines developed by BioNTech and Pfizer (the first one, on 21 December 2020), Moderna, AstraZeneca and most recently Janssen Pharmaceutica NV (on 11 March 2021). Overall, the European Union has secured up to 2.6 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines so

1 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/99 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. 2 Also known as Covid-19 or Sars-CoV-2 3 However, there are indications that vaccines are effective against these three variants circulating in the European Union: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20210311STO99733/covid-19-variants-state-of-play-and-impact-on-vaccination-in-the-eu

far, and on 11 March 2021, at the end of the fieldwork, 43.1 Million doses had been administered in the EU.

On 17 March 2021, the Commission adopted a legislative proposal establishing a common framework for a digital green certificate5 covering vaccination, testing and recovery. This certificate aims to facilitate free movement within the EU, in full respect of the principle of non-discrimination and the fundamental rights of EU citizens.

The economy

The coronavirus pandemic is having a major impact on the European economy. However, while the various indicators collapsed during the first half of 2020, due to the containment measures taken in most EU countries, they tended to recover sharply in the third quarter and then to fall again in the fourth quarter, after the restrictions put in place to counter the second wave of the epidemic.

In the end, growth fell very sharply in 2020, but less than the very pessimistic forecasts of the summer of 2020 had feared: -6.8% in the euro area, and -6.3% in the EU. The forecasts published by the European Commission in its Winter 2021 European Economic Forecast6 predict an increase of +3.7% in EU27, and by +3.8% in the euro area for 2021.

The unemployment rate also fluctuated during the course of 2020: after rising sharply in the first half of 2020, it finally fell again in the second half of the year, to stand at 7.3% in the EU as a whole in January 20217 (stable from December 2020, and up from 6.6% in January 2020). Unemployment in the euro area was 8.1% in January 2021 (also stable from December 2020, and up from 7.4% in January 2020).

EU-related events since the summer 2020 survey:

On 16 September 2020, the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen delivered her first State of the Union speech8 where she outlined her vision for the EU and the priorities for the year ahead. She also announced plans to reduce EU greenhouse gas emissions, to ensure a successful digital transformation of Europe by 20309 and presented measures to step up action against racism and a new approach to migration.

On 14 October, the European Commission presented a series of new policies on energy policy to help build a climate neutral Europe10, including actions on renovation of buildings and a strategy to reduce emissions of methane. The Commission also announces a new Chemicals Strategy11, the first step towards a zero pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment.

On 27 October, as part of the EU’s efforts to preserve jobs and livelihoods affected by the coronavirus pandemic, the

4 https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en 5 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1181 6 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/economy-finance/ip144_en_1.pdf 7 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/portlet_file_entry/2995521/3-04032021-AP-EN.pdf/cb6e5dd6-56c2-2196-16b7-baf811b84a4f 8 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_20_1655 9 “Europe’s Digital decade” 10 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_20_1901 11 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1839

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20210311STO99733/covid-19-variants-state-of-play-and-impact-on-vaccination-in-the-eu



https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age_en

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age_en

https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combatting-discrimination/racism-and-xenophobia/eu-anti-racism-action-plan-2020-2025_en

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1706



https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en


https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/economy-finance/ip144_en_1.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/portlet_file_entry/2995521/3-04032021-AP-EN.pdf/cb6e5dd6-56c2-2196-16b7-baf811b84a4f

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/portlet_file_entry/2995521/3-04032021-AP-EN.pdf/cb6e5dd6-56c2-2196-16b7-baf811b84a4f

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_20_1655

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_20_1901



6

European Commission distributed €17 billion to Italy, Spain and Poland under the Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) programme. SURE can provide up to €100 billion in financial support to all Member States.

On 11 November, the European Commission took the first steps towards building a European Health Union with proposals to strengthen the EU's health security framework and to reinforce the crisis preparedness and response role of key EU agencies.

Elections in the EU since the summer 2020 survey:

The period was marked by major elections in Lithuania, Romania, and Portugal.

On 1 October 2020, Alexander De Croo was sworn as the new Belgian Prime minister following negotiations initiated after the 26 May 2019 general elections.

In Lithuania, the Homeland Party, Christian Democrats (TS-LKD), led by Ingrida Simonyte came first, winning 50 of the 141 seats of the Seimas during the parliamentary elections held in October 2020.

Parliamentary elections took place in Romania on 6 December 2020, where the Social Democratic Party (PSD) won 29.7% of the votes, ahead the National Liberal Party (PNL), led by outgoing Prime Minister Ludovic Orban, which won 25.2%.

In Portugal, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa was re-elected on 24 January President of the Republic, in the first round of voting, with 60.7% of the votes.

Other elections took place just after the end of fieldwork:

In Germany, regional elections in the west of the country (Baden-Württemberg and Rheinland-Pfalz) on 14 March were marked by a serious setback of the Chancellor Merkel’s CDU party.

In the Netherlands, the liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) of outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte came first with 34 seats in the general elections (15-17 March).

Other noteworthy events since the summer 2020 survey:

In the USA, following the presidential election held in November 2020, the Biden presidency began on January 20, 2021, when Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46th president of the United States. The inauguration took place after the Capitol had been invaded on January 6th by demonstrators, causing five deaths, during the joint session of Congress assembled to count electoral votes to formalize Joe Biden's victory.

Impact of climate change: In August and September 2020, San Francisco and other parts of the American West were stricken by massive fires. In November, hurricanes devastated Central America, killing more than 200 people while gigantic fires destroyed 40% of the forests on Fraser Island (Australia, Queensland). According to provisional data from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), 2020 will be the second hottest year on record, after 2016.

On 20 August 2020, Russia's leading opposition figure Alexei Navalny was hospitalised after falling seriously ill, before being allowed to undergo emergency treatment in Germany. He went back to Russia in February 2021 and was immediately sent to jail. On 2 March, the Council of the EU

decided to impose restrictive measures on four Russian individuals responsible for serious human rights violations and involved in Navalny’s arbitrary arrest.

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: on 27 September 2020, fighting broke out between Azerbaijani forces and those of Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave with an Armenian majority that has been disputed for decades. After six weeks of fighting (and more than 5,000 dead), a ceasefire was signed in November which consecrated Azerbaijan's victory.

Myanmar (Burma): on 1 February 2021, a coup was perpetrated by military forces which proclaimed a year-long state of emergency and declared the transfer of power to the Commander-in-Chief of Defence Services.

Terrorist attacks:

On 4 October 2020, in Dresden, Germany, one person was killed with a knife in an Islamist attack.

On 16 October, in Conflans-Saint-Honorine, France, a history teacher, Samuel Paty, was beheaded by a radicalised Islamist after showing cartoons of Mohammed during a lesson on freedom of expression.

On 29 October, three worshippers in the Basilica of Nice (south-east France) were killed with a knife by a Tunisian who had recently arrived in Europe.

On 2 November, four people were killed in an Islamist attack in Vienna, the first such attack in Austria.



https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0724&qid=1605690513438


7

Methodology used for this survey

Exceptionally, this Standard Eurobarometer survey 94 was conducted during winter 2020-2021 (February-March 2021) instead of autumn because of the coronavirus pandemic and in some countries, alternative interview modes to face-to-face were necessary as a result of the situation.

When possible, the methodology used was that of the Standard Eurobarometer surveys carried out by the Directorate-General for Communication (“Media monitoring and Eurobarometer” Unit)12. However, because of the coronavirus pandemic, it was difficult, and sometimes impossible to conduct face to face interviews in a number of countries of the European Union. In these countries, we have interviewed respondents online, mostly after recruiting them in a probabilistic way by telephone. A technical note concerning the interviews conducted by the member institutes of the Kantar network is annexed to this report. It also specifies the confidence intervals13.

Following the EU General Data Protection Regulation14 (GDPR), respondents were asked whether or not they would agree to be asked questions on issues that could be considered “sensitive”.

Note: In this report, EU countries are referred to by their official abbreviation. The abbreviations used in this report correspond to:

Belgium BE Lithuania LT Bulgaria BG Luxembourg LU Czechia CZ Hungary HU Denmark DK Malta MT Germany DE The Netherlands NL Estonia EE Austria AT Ireland IE Poland PL Greece EL Portugal PT Spain ES Romania RO France FR Slovenia SI Croatia HR Slovakia SK Italy IT Finland FI Republic of Cyprus

CY * Sweden SE

Latvia LV

European Union – weighted average for the 27 Member States

EU27

BE, FR, IT, LU, DE, AT, ES, PT, IE, NL, FI, EL, EE, SI, CY, MT, SK, LV, LT

Euro area

BG, CZ, DK, HR, HU, PL, RO, SE Non euro area

12 https://www.europa.eu/eurobarometer 13 The results tables are annexed. It should be noted that the total of the percentages indicated in the tables in this report may exceed 100% when the respondent was able to choose several answers to the same question.

* Cyprus as a whole is one of the 27 European Union Member States. However, the ‘acquis communautaire’ has been suspended in the part of the country which is not controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus. For practical reasons, only the interviews carried out in the part of the country controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus are included in the ‘CY’ category and in the EU27 average.

We wish to thank the people throughout the European Union who have given their time to take part in this

survey. Without their active participation, this study would not

have been possible.

14 2016/679


8

I. EUROPEANS AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS


9

1. Trust in national governments and parliaments and in the European Union: trend

Close to half of Europeans trust the European Union (49%), after a steep 6-point increase since the Standard Eurobarometer of summer 2020, EB93. It’s the highest level registered since spring 2008. At the same time, trust in national governments (36%, -4 percentage points since summer 2020, but +2 since autumn 2019) and national parliaments (35%, -1 since summer 2020, +1 since autumn 2019) have lost ground, though both remain at a higher level than in autumn 2019. As a

consequence, at +13, the percentage point gap between trust in the European Union and trust in the national government is the highest measured since autumn 2010, when it stood at +15.

Distrust of the European Union has decreased (43% “tend not to trust”, -5 percentage points since summer 2020), while distrust of national governments (60%, +4) and national parliaments (60%, +2) has increased.

QA6b How much trust do you have in certain institutions? For each of the following institutions, do you tend to trust it or tend not to trust it?(% - EU - TEND TO TRUST)

50

44 4548

45

57

48 5047 47 48

42 43 41

3431 33 31 31 31

3740

32 3336

42 41 42 42 44 43 43

49

3835 35

3833

43

35 34 34 32 30 31 31 3327 28 28 26 25

2830 31

28 2832 36 35 34 35 34 34 36 3534

31 3135

30

41

34 32 34 3229 29 28

32

2428 27 25 23

27 29 3127 27

31

37 36 34 35 34 3440

36

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

THE EUROPEAN UNION

THE (NATIONALITY) PARLIAMENT

THE (NATIONALITY)

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020(2021)


10

2. Trust in the European Union: national results and evolutions

In 20 Member States, a majority of respondents say they trust the EU (up from 15 in summer 2020), with the highest levels observed in Portugal (78%), Ireland (74%) and Lithuania (70%). More than six respondents in ten trust the EU in Malta and Estonia (both 64%), Denmark (62%), and the Netherlands and Latvia (both 61%), and at least half of them do so in Hungary (59%), Romania and Sweden

(both 58%), Belgium (56%), Luxembourg and Slovenia (both 55%), Bulgaria (53%), Spain (52%), Croatia (51%), and Poland and Slovakia (both 50%). In Germany, a relative majority tend to trust the EU (48% vs 44% “tend not to trust”), and in Finland, public opinion is evenly divided (50% “tend to trust” vs 50% “tend not to trust”).

At the other end of the scale, distrust is the majority view in Greece (63%), Austria (53%), Czechia and Cyprus (both 52%), France (49% vs 39% “tend to trust”) and Italy (46% vs 44%).


11

At national level, trust in the EU has increased in 23 EU Member States since the Standard Eurobarometer of summer 2020 (EB93), most spectacularly in Portugal (78%, +22 percentage points), Malta (64%, +19), Italy (44%, +16), Belgium (56%, +13), Czechia (48%, +13), the Netherlands (61%, +12), Lithuania (70%, +11) and Spain (52%, +10). Conversely, trust has declined in three countries: Poland (50%, -6), Austria (41%, -3) and Denmark (62%, -1), and has remained unchanged in Germany, at 48%.

As a result of these changes, the majority in Belgium, Luxembourg, Slovenia, Spain, and Slovakia now tend to trust the EU.

3. The image of the European Union: trend

At 46%, the positive image of the EU has reached its highest level since autumn 2009, after a 6-percentage point increase since summer 2020. This is the largest increase on this indicator since spring 2007. The neutral image of the EU has lost some ground (38%, -2), while at 15% (-4), the negative image has reached its lowest level since autumn 2009.

QA6b.10

Tend

to tr

ust

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Tend

not

to tr

ust

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Don'

t kno

w

EU27 49 6 43 5 8EURO AREA 48 8 44 7 8

NON-EURO AREA 54 2 38 = 8PT 78 22 21 13 1MT 64 19 23 13 13IT 44 16 46 15 10BE 56 13 44 10 0CZ 48 13 52 4 0NL 61 12 35 10 4LT 70 11 30 9 0ES 52 10 38 10 10FR 39 9 49 8 12SE 58 8 41 6 1SI 55 8 45 3 0LV 61 7 39 7 0EE 64 6 36 6 0HU 59 6 36 4 5LU 55 6 45 6 0BG 53 5 29 3 18SK 50 5 44 2 6EL 37 5 63 3 0RO 58 4 35 3 7HR 51 2 44 = 5CY 39 2 52 2 9IE 74 1 26 = 0FI 50 1 50 1 0DE 48 = 44 = 8DK 62 1 38 7 0AT 41 3 53 3 6PL 50 6 38 6 12

How much trust do you have in certain institutions? For each of thefollowing institutions, do you tend to trust it or tend not to trust it?The European Union (%)

D78 In general, does the EU conjure up for you a very positive, fairly positive, neutral, fairly negative or very negative image? (% - EU)

3234

3134 35 36 36 35 37

40

38

4139 39 39 39 38

37 38

38 38 38

37 37 37 36 37 3740

38

2 3 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

5046

5249 48

45 4548

42

38

40

31 31 30 30 3135

3941

3734 35

40 40 4043

4542

40

46

1517

15 14 1517 16 15

19 20 20

2628 29 29 28

2522

1923

2725

21 21 21 2017

20 1915

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

NEUTRAL

DON'T KNOW

TOTAL 'POSITIVE'

TOTAL 'NEGATIVE'

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020(2021)


12

4. The image of the European Union: evolutions and national results

In 25 EU Member States a majority of respondents have a positive image of the EU (up from 13 in the Standard Eurobarometer of summer 2020 (EB93)), with the highest proportions observed in Portugal (76%) and Ireland (75%), and at least half of the population sharing this view in Bulgaria (59%), Lithuania (57%), Estonia (55%), Luxembourg and Slovenia (both 54%), Latvia and Poland (both 53%), and Malta and the Netherlands (both 50%).

Since summer 2020, the proportion of respondents with a positive image of the EU has increased in 24 Member States, in particular in Malta (50%, +25 percentage points), Portugal (76%, +21), Czechia (49%, +19), the Netherlands (50%, +14), Luxembourg (54%, +13), Slovenia (54%, +12), Italy (43%, +12), Latvia (53%, +10) and Spain (45%, +10). The proportion of respondents with a positive image of the EU has decreased in Romania (47%, -4), Poland (53%, -2) and Hungary (48%, -1).

In three Member States (down from 13 in summer 2020), the EU conjures up a predominantly neutral image for respondents: Greece (42%), Austria (39%), and Spain, where respondents are equally likely to be positive or neutral (both 45%).

There are only five countries where more than a fifth of respondents have a negative image of the EU: Austria (25%), Greece (24%), and Belgium, Czechia and Finland (all 23%).

D78

Tota

l 'Po

sitiv

e'

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Neu

tral

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Tota

l 'N

egat

ive'

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Don'

t kno

w

EU27 46 6 38 2 15 4 1MT 50 25 42 14 6 4 2PT 76 21 21 14 3 6 0CZ 49 19 28 13 23 6 0NL 50 14 36 7 14 7 0LU 54 13 32 = 14 13 0SI 54 12 40 8 6 4 0IT 43 12 38 1 18 11 1LV 53 10 34 14 13 5 0ES 45 10 45 3 8 7 2EE 55 9 34 3 11 6 0CY 44 8 38 5 18 3 0FR 41 8 38 5 20 4 1SK 43 7 41 1 15 7 1EL 34 7 42 1 24 8 0BG 59 6 25 2 14 6 2LT 57 6 35 8 8 3 0SE 46 5 35 3 18 3 1FI 40 5 37 3 23 2 0IE 75 4 19 1 6 3 0DE 49 2 37 = 13 3 1DK 47 2 34 6 19 5 0BE 39 2 38 1 23 3 0HR 48 1 41 1 11 2 0AT 35 1 39 3 25 4 1HU 48 1 42 3 10 2 0PL 53 2 39 2 8 = 0RO 47 4 46 9 7 4 0

In general, does the EU conjure up for you a very positive, fairly positive,neutral, fairly negative or very negative image?(%)

13

II. THE ECONOMIC SITUATION


14

1. Current situation of the economy at national level: trend, national results and evolution

After the very large drop registered in summer 2020 (-13 percentage points between autumn 2019 and summer 2020), perceptions of the situation of the national economy have

continued to deteriorate: 29% of EU citizens now think that their national economic situation is “good” (-5 percentage points since summer 2020), the lowest level for this indicator since spring 2013. Symmetrically, the proportion of Europeans who consider this situation to be “bad” has also gained ground (+5), and more than two-thirds now share this view (69%). At 2%, the proportion who say they “don’t know” has remained unchanged.

QA1a.2 How would you judge the current situation in each of the following?The situation of the (NATIONALITY) economy (% - EU)

4 4 2 3 4 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 2 2

34 3641

47

52

48

29

2023 22

28 30 28 27 27 2631

34 3438 40 39 41

46 48

49 49 49

47

3429

62

5056

50

44

49

69

7875 77

70 6871 71 72 72

6863 63

59 57 57 5651 49

47 48 47

50

6469

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

DON'T KNOW

TOTAL 'GOOD'

TOTAL 'BAD'

20042005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020(2021)


15

Perceptions of the current situation of the national economy varies widely between EU Member States, ranging from 86% in Luxembourg, down to 7% in Italy. Positive perceptions are now in the majority in eight EU Member States (down from 10 in summer 2020). More than two-thirds of the population see their national

economic situation in a positive light in Luxembourg (86%), Sweden (81%), Denmark (71%) and the Netherlands (70%), while no more than one in ten do so in Italy (7%), Spain (8%), and Portugal, Greece, Bulgaria (all 10%).


16

Compared with the Standard Eurobarometer of summer 2020 (EB93), positive perceptions of the current situation of the national economy have lost ground in 23 countries, with double-digit decreases in Poland (34%, -19 percentage points), Cyprus (23%, -17), Austria (23%, -13), Hungary (36%, -12) and Denmark (71%, -11). They have improved in four countries, in particular in Belgium (50%, +10) and Sweden (81%, +7).

As a result of these changes, the positive perception has now become the minority view in Poland.

QA1a.2

Tota

l 'Go

od'

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Tota

l 'Ba

d'

Win

.202

0/20

21 -

Sum

.202

0

Don'

t kno

w

EU27 29 5 69 5 2

EURO AREA 28 3 71 4 1NON-EURO AREA 36 10 61 10 3

BE 50 10 50 9 0SE 81 7 18 7 1LU 86 3 14 2 0EL 10 1 90 1 0MT 59 1 35 2 6FI 52 2 48 2 0

RO 26 2 70 = 4FR 17 2 79 3 4HR 13 2 87 3 0BG 10 2 82 = 8PT 10 2 90 3 0DE 52 3 46 3 2ES 8 3 91 3 1IT 7 3 93 4 0SI 42 5 58 7 0EE 60 6 40 6 0LT 50 6 50 9 0IE 42 6 58 6 0SK 17 6 82 8 1LV 20 8 80 12 0NL 70 9 30 10 0CZ 30 9 70 11 0DK 71 11 29 17 0HU 36 12 63 14 1AT 23 13 77 14 0CY 23 17 76 16 1PL 34 19 63 22 3

How would you judge the current situation in each of the following?The situation of the (NATIONALITY) economy (%)


17

2. Support for the Euro: trend and national results

Support for a European economic and monetary union with one single currency, the euro has reached new highs: 79% of citizens in the euro area are for the euro, the highest point since 2004. While support increased almost continuously between spring 2016 and autumn 2019 (from 68% up to 76%), it had lost 1-percentage point between autumn 2019 and summer 2020. It is

now on the rise again, after a 4-point increase. In parallel, the proportion of respondents who are opposed to the euro continues to decrease (15%, -2).

Overall in the European Union, seven in ten Europeans are for the euro (70%, +3 percentage points since summer 2020, +15 since spring 2016), the highest level ever recorded. Conversely, less than a quarter of Europeans are “against” a European economic and monetary union with one single currency, the euro (23%, -2), the lowest level of opposition since 2004.

QB3.1 What is your opinion on each of the following statements? Please tell for each statement, whether you are for it or against it.A European economic and monetary union with one single currency, the euro (% - EU)

6359 60 59 60 63 61 60 61 61 60

56 58 5653 52 53 51 52

55 56 57 56 5558 60 61 61 62 62 62

677070

66 6865

68 70 69 6770 69 67 65

68 66 64 6366

62 6367 67 69 68 68 70

73 74 74 75 76 76 7579

3135 34 34 33 31 31 33 32 33 33

37 35 3740 40 40 42 41

36 36 36 37 38 36 34 33 32 32 30 2925 23

2530

27 28 27 25 2427 25 26 27 29

26 28 29 30 2831 31

26 26 25 26 26 2522 21 20 20 18 18 17 156 6 7 7 6 6 8 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 7 7 7 9 8 7 7 7 6 6 6 7 6

8 9 8 70%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

FOR

FOR (EURO AREA)

AGAINST

AGAINST (EURO AREA)

DON'T KNOW/ REFUSAL

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020(2021)


18

A majority of respondents are in favour of “a European economic and monetary union with one single currency, the euro” in 22 EU Member States (unchanged since summer 2020). The highest proportions of support are seen in Portugal (95%), Slovenia (94%), Ireland (91%), and Luxembourg and Belgium (both 90%). Between eight and nine respondents in ten also support the euro in Estonia and Latvia (both 89%), Spain and Slovakia (both 86%), the Netherlands (85%), Lithuania (84%), Germany (82%) and Greece (81%). At least seven in ten do so in Cyprus (79%), Malta and Finland (both 76%), Italy (72%), and France and Austria (both 70%). Support is also predominant in three countries outside the euro area: Hungary (63%), Romania

(55%) and Croatia (48% vs 45% “against”). In five countries, all located outside the euro area, a majority of respondents say they are against the euro: Sweden (73%), Denmark (68%), Czechia (60%), Poland (56%), and Bulgaria, where opinion is almost evenly divided (41% vs 40% “for”).

Since summer 2020, support for the euro has increased in 20 Member States, most strikingly in Czechia (40%, +19 percentage points), Portugal (95%, +13), Italy (72%, +12) and Lithuania (84%, +10). It has decreased in three countries, by no more than 2-percentage points, and remains unchanged in four.

19

III. THE MAIN CONCERNS OF EUROPEANS


20

1. Main concerns at European level: trend

Close to four EU citizens in ten consider health as the most important issue facing the EU at the moment: this item is now mentioned by 38% of respondents, after a steep increase of 16 percentage points since summer 2020 when this item was introduced in the question. It has taken first place ahead of the economic situation (35%, unchanged), while the state of Member States’ public finances has slid into third position, with 21% of mentions (-2).

The environment and climate change is now in fourth place (20%, unchanged), while immigration, at 18% after a 5-point decrease, has fallen out of the leading trio of concerns for the first time since autumn 2014. Unemployment is in sixth position, with 15% of mentions (-2 percentage points).

Seven items are then cited by less than one respondent in ten: rising prices/ inflation/ cost of living (9%, -1), the EU’s influence in the world (9%, -1), terrorism (6%, -1), crime (5%, -1), pensions (3%, -1), energy supply (3%, unchanged) and taxation (3%, unchanged).


21

2. Main concerns at European level: national results

Health leads the ranking of main concerns at EU level, but the economic situation is the only issue that appears in the top three concerns in all EU Member States

Health, mentioned by 38% of respondents in the EU overall, is considered to be the most important issue facing the EU in 16 Member States (up from 3 in the Standard Eurobarometer of summer 2020), with the highest proportions in Italy (60%), Czechia (50%) and Slovenia (47%). It is in equal first place in France, along with the economic situation (both 33%). It is the second most important concern in five countries, in particular Latvia (40%) and Ireland (39%), and the third one in three.

The economic situation is in second position at EU level, with 35% of mentions, and it is the most mentioned issue in six countries, with the highest proportions in Portugal (50%) and Latvia (46%). In the Netherlands, it is in equal first place with the environment and climate change (both 38%). This issue ranks second in 19 countries, led by Italy (46%) and Slovenia (43%), while in Luxembourg, it shares second place with the environment and climate change (both 35%). The economic situation comes in third place in Belgium (35%) and Malta (31%).

In third place at the overall EU level is the state of Member States' public finances (21%). This is the first answer given in Finland (45%), and the second most mentioned issue in Portugal (33%). It ranks third in seven countries, with the highest proportion in Greece (35%).

The environment and climate change is mentioned by 20% of Europeans and ranks first among respondents in Sweden (55%), Denmark (43%), the Netherlands (38%), Belgium (37%) and Germany (31%). It is the second most mentioned issue in Luxembourg (35%) and France (24%), and in third place in Ireland (34%), Finland (29%) and Lithuania (23%).

In fifth place at EU level with 18% of mentions, immigration is the first answer given in Cyprus (44%), the second in Malta (34%), and the third in eight countries, led by Czechia (32%) and Hungary (30%).

Unemployment, mentioned by 15% of EU citizens overall in sixth position, is the third most given answer in Spain (32%), Italy (25%) and Austria (22%).

Other issues (rising prices/inflation/cost of living, the EU’s influence in the world, terrorism, crime, pensions, energy supply and taxation) are mentioned by less than 10% of respondents at EU level, and rising prices/inflation/cost of living is the only one of these that makes the top three in any Member State, in third position in Romania (18%).


22

QA5

Heal

th

Econ

omic

situa

tion

The

stat

e of

Mem

ber S

tate

s' pu

blic

finan

ces

The

envi

ronm

ent a

nd cl

imat

e ch

ange

Imm

igra

tion

Unem

ploy

men

t

Risin

g pr

ices/

infla

tion/

cost

of l

ivin

g

EU's

influ

ence

in th

e w

orld

Terr

orism

Crim

e

Pens

ions

Ener

gy su

pply

Taxa

tion

EU27 38 35 21 20 18 15 9 9 6 5 3 3 3

BE 36 35 25 37 19 5 8 14 4 5 2 6 2BG 43 31 11 9 28 11 11 8 11 4 3 4 2CZ 50 35 24 17 32 3 7 13 8 2 1 2 1DK 28 40 19 43 25 8 2 11 9 3 0 2 1DE 26 30 27 31 21 10 8 14 4 5 3 4 2EE 46 37 24 20 22 9 6 17 5 2 1 7 2IE 39 40 28 34 11 15 8 11 2 2 1 3 3EL 42 39 35 8 24 15 5 12 5 5 1 1 2ES 42 36 15 8 17 32 7 4 3 2 5 2 3FR 33 33 15 24 18 14 10 8 13 11 3 3 1HR 40 31 20 11 17 18 11 9 14 10 3 3 2IT 60 46 20 7 10 25 5 2 2 3 4 2 5CY 30 35 12 6 44 24 4 2 12 16 3 0 1LV 40 46 16 15 18 15 9 17 6 3 2 2 4LT 36 37 13 23 15 17 14 17 10 3 1 3 4LU 39 35 23 35 15 18 6 10 6 4 2 3 2HU 32 31 24 15 30 10 10 11 13 5 3 4 2MT 46 31 17 17 34 9 9 5 3 8 2 2 2NL 33 38 26 38 27 5 4 14 3 2 0 4 2AT 40 37 18 17 13 22 15 11 5 6 5 3 3PL 41 29 20 15 15 9 18 9 7 6 5 4 6PT 31 50 33 23 13 20 8 8 4 2 1 1 3RO 39 27 16 12 13 8 18 8 7 9 5 5 4SI 47 43 21 20 26 8 5 11 7 5 1 3 2SK 44 34 23 16 21 7 14 11 8 6 2 1 1FI 20 33 45 29 20 6 7 19 8 5 0 3 1SE 20 25 16 55 23 13 3 11 8 11 1 10 1

What do you think are the two most important issues facing the EU at the moment?(MAX. 2 ANSWERS)(%)

1st MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM

2nd MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM

3rd MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM


23

3. Main concerns at national level: trend

Health is now perceived as the most important national issue (44%), after a 13-percentage point increase since summer 2020. The economic situation is in second place, mentioned by a third of Europeans (33%, unchanged), while a quarter cite unemployment (25%, -3).

In fourth place, with 16% of mentions, rising

prices/inflation/cost of living has lost two percentage points since summer 2020, while the environment and climate change (13%, -1), government debt (13%, -1) and the education system (13%, +4) share fifth place.

Less than one in ten, but more than one in twenty EU citizens then mentioned pensions (7%, -3 percentage points), immigration (7%, -4), crime (6%, -2), and housing (6%, +1). Finally, and unchanged since summer 2020, taxation (5%), terrorism (3%) and energy supply (2%) are only marginal concerns.


24

4. Main concerns at national level: national results

In all 27 EU Member States, health is seen by respondents as one of the top three main issues facing their country.

Health is the highest ranked national concern, with 44% of mentions. It is the most mentioned issue in 20 countries (up from 10 in summer 2020), with the highest proportions in Estonia (62%), Italy (61%) and Slovakia (59%). In Belgium, it shares first place with the economic situation (both 33%). It the second most given answer in Greece (42%), Sweden (35%) and Luxembourg (31%), and the third one in four Member States.

The economic situation, in second place, is mentioned by 33% of Europeans. It is the most mentioned answer in six EU countries, led by Greece (59%), Cyprus (54%) and Portugal (52%). It ranks second in eight countries, with the highest proportions in Italy (47%) and Latvia (42%). In Bulgaria, it shares second place with rising prices/inflation/cost of living (both 33%). It is the third most given answer in ten EU Member States, in particular in Spain (40%). In Malta, it shares third place with rising prices/inflation/cost of living (both 24%).

At an overall EU level, unemployment ranks third with 25% of mentions. It is the second most mentioned item in seven countries, in particular in Spain (51%), and stands in third place in four countries.

Rising prices/inflation/cost of living is in fourth position at EU level, mentioned by 16% of respondents. This concern ranks second in four countries, with the highest proportions in Poland (40%) and Hungary (37%), and is in third place in four Member States.

In equal fifth place, the environment and climate change, government debt and the education system are all mentioned by 13% of EU citizens. The environment and climate change is the most mentioned issue in Sweden (36%). It is in second place in Malta (28%) and Germany (27%) and in third in Denmark (36%), the Netherlands (35%) and Belgium (21%). Government debt is the second most mentioned issue in Czechia (37%), Finland (34%) and Belgium (27%), and the third most mentioned issue in Slovenia (25%). The education system is in third place in Latvia, with 24% of mentions.

All other items – pensions, immigration, crime, housing, taxation, terrorism and energy supply, are mentioned by less than 10% overall. Of these, crime is the third most mentioned issue in Sweden, with 30% of mentions, while housing comes first, by far, in Luxembourg (51%) and second in Ireland (35%). None of the other concerns rank in the top three in any Member State.


25

QA3a

Heal

th

Econ

omic

situa

tion

Unem

ploy

men

t

Risin

g pr

ices/

infla

tion/

cost

of l

ivin

g

The

envi

ronm

ent a

nd cl

imat

e ch

ange

Gove

rnm

ent d

ebt

The

educ

atio

n sy

stem

Pens

ions

Imm

igra

tion

Crim

e

Hous

ing

Taxa

tion

Terr

orism

Ener

gy su

pply

EU27 44 33 25 16 13 13 13 7 7 6 6 5 3 2

BE 33 33 12 13 21 27 10 9 9 5 5 10 1 8BG 47 33 30 33 4 4 10 11 5 6 1 2 1 2CZ 52 35 5 19 5 37 22 7 2 1 7 1 0 0DK 47 37 13 5 36 17 9 3 11 4 3 4 3 2DE 31 23 12 14 27 18 22 7 10 4 12 3 3 3EE 62 38 26 17 10 7 14 7 5 1 1 4 0 7IE 54 25 19 17 14 15 8 2 2 4 35 2 0 1EL 42 59 37 8 1 13 9 4 11 4 0 7 1 0ES 53 40 51 6 3 6 5 6 6 4 2 4 0 1FR 40 24 31 13 17 11 12 7 9 14 4 3 9 1HR 31 38 37 22 3 16 3 11 3 20 3 4 1 1IT 61 47 34 6 3 9 7 6 6 2 2 7 3 1CY 29 54 44 8 3 3 13 4 16 10 3 3 1 0LV 49 42 22 16 2 10 24 6 1 2 2 22 0 0LT 40 24 32 31 4 14 20 9 3 2 1 14 1 2LU 31 17 14 25 18 7 10 5 5 6 51 5 1 2HU 50 30 20 37 6 9 7 10 7 3 4 3 1 2MT 50 24 8 24 28 1 4 4 22 10 7 1 0 3NL 54 37 7 8 35 5 14 3 6 3 18 4 1 2AT 43 31 36 17 12 14 10 5 9 6 4 3 3 3PL 44 29 10 40 8 13 10 10 4 5 4 8 3 4PT 32 52 40 17 4 14 7 5 0 3 4 16 0 0RO 43 28 12 31 6 8 15 15 3 6 5 5 2 4SI 51 40 20 8 6 25 9 7 8 8 7 5 0 1SK 59 39 17 30 7 6 15 7 4 3 3 3 0 0FI 31 36 28 9 22 34 8 4 10 3 2 8 0 2SE 35 11 17 5 36 1 19 7 17 30 8 3 2 9

What do you think are the two most important issues facing (OUR COUNTRY) at themoment? (MAX. 2 ANSWERS)(%)

2nd MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM

3rd MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM

1st MOST FREQUENTLYMENTIONED ITEM

26

IV. THE EU AND THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC


27

1. Satisfaction with the measures to fight the crisis: trend and national results

Close to half of Europeans are not satisfied with the measures taken to fight the coronavirus pandemic by the European Union (49%, +5 percentage points since summer 2020), while 43% are satisfied (-2), and 8% answer that they don’t know (-3). As a result of these evolutions, the majority opinion has switched since summer 2020.

A clear majority of Europeans are not satisfied with the measures taken by their national government to fight the coronavirus pandemic: 56% are “not satisfied” (+19 percentage points since summer 2020), while 43% (-19) are satisfied. Just 1% answer that they don’t know. Satisfaction has deteriorated spectacularly since summer 2020, when the situation was the opposite, with 62% “satisfied” vs. 37% “not satisfied”.

There are 13 EU Member States where a majority of respondents are satisfied with the measures taken by the European Union to fight the pandemic (down from 19 Member States in summer 2020), with the highest proportions seen in Denmark (68%), Lithuania (67%) and Portugal (66%). In 12 countries, majorities of respondents are “not satisfied”, led by Greece (68%), Luxembourg (63%) and Belgium (61%). In Spain (44% “satisfied”, vs 44% not satisfied) and the Netherlands (43% vs 43%), public opinion is evenly divided.

Satisfaction with the measures taken by the European Union to fight the coronavirus pandemic has dropped in 14 countries since summer 2020, in particular in Germany (33%, -16 percentage points), Ireland (56%, -15), Estonia (42%, -13), Slovakia (39%, -13), Greece (31%, -10), Cyprus (49%, -10) and Finland (45%, -10). It has increased in 12 countries, most strikingly in Denmark (68%, +11), Italy (46%; +10), Malta (55%, +9), Lithuania (67%, +8), Portugal (66%, +8), Sweden (55%, +8) and Spain (44%, +8) and remains unchanged in Luxembourg.


28

Satisfaction with the measures taken by the national government varies sharply between the different EU Member States, ranging from 79% in Denmark to 21% in Latvia. Overall, a majority of respondents are satisfied with the measures taken by their government in 11 Member States (down from 24 in summer 2020). Public opinion is now evenly divided in Spain (44% satisfied vs. 44% not satisfied). In 15 countries, majorities of respondents are “not satisfied”, with at least three-quarters sharing this view in Latvia (79%), Czechia (76%) and Slovakia (75%).

Since summer 2020, satisfaction has deteriorated in all EU Member States. Most evolutions show massive decreases, particularly in Latvia (21%, -56 percentage points), Czechia (24%, -47), Estonia (45%, -40), Malta (53%, -39), Slovakia (25%, -38), Greece (39%, -36), Cyprus (53%, -34), Slovenia (31%, -33) and Austria (47%, -30).


29

2. Trust in the EU to make the right decisions in the future: trend and national results

When thinking about EU’s response to the pandemic, close to six in ten Europeans trust the EU to make the right decisions in the future (59%, -3 percentage points since summer 2020). Less than four in ten do not trust the EU in this regard (39%, +3), and 2% say they don’t know (unchanged).

At least half of the population trust the EU to take the right decisions in the future in 24 countries, and more than three-quarters do so in Portugal (89%), Malta (79%) and Hungary (77%). At the other end of the scale, majorities do not trust the EU to take the right decisions in the future in Greece (55%), Czechia (53%) and Austria (50%).

Compared with summer 2020, trust in the EU to take the right decisions in the future has lost ground in 17 countries, in particular in Germany (50%, -15), Ireland (70%, -11), Belgium (55%, -11), Latvia (61%, -10) and Slovakia (56%, -10). It has increased in seven, most strikingly in Malta (79%, +21), Portugal (89%, +13) and Italy (60%; +10), and remains unchanged in three: Bulgaria (62%), Cyprus (65%) and the Netherlands (68%).

QA12 Thinking about EU's response to the coronavirus pandemic, to what extent do you trust ornot the EU to make the right decisions in the future?(% - EU)

(Winter 2020/2021 - Summer 2020)

Totally trust5 (-2)

Tend to trust54 (-1)

Tend not to trust30 (+1)

Do not trust at all9 (+2)

Don't know2 (=)


30

3. EU priorities in its response to the coronavirus pandemic

Ensuring rapid access to safe and effective vaccines to all EU citizens should be the first priority of the European Union in its response to the pandemic: this item is mentioned by 36% of respondents, way ahead of the other dimensions.

This is followed by a group of priorities all mentioned by around a quarter of Europeans: establish a European strategy for facing a similar crisis in the future (28%), develop a European health policy (27%), invest more money to develop treatments and vaccines (25%), support global response to coronavirus to ensure universal access to a vaccine or treatment (24%), invest more money in the economy for a sustainable and fair recovery in all the EU Member States and enable the EU Member States to support businesses and workers affected by the pandemic (both 23%).

Less than one in five consider that the EU, in its response to the coronavirus pandemic, should first enforce stricter control of the external borders of the EU (18%), and 15% think that it should ensure the management and coordination of a stockpile of strategic medical equipment common to the EU Member States. Almost as many think the EU should encourage the relocation of industries back to the EU from abroad and encourage coordination and solidarity both between the EU Member States and with our neighbours (both 14%).

Finally, one in ten think the EU should coordinate possible restrictions to the free movement of people between EU Member States (10%).


31

Ensuring rapid access to safe and effective vaccines to all EU citizens, in first place at EU level with 36% of mentions, is the first given answer in 19 Member States, led by Finland (61%) and Czechia (60%). In Bulgaria, it shares first place with two other items: investing more money in the economy for a sustainable and fair recovery in all EU Member States, and enabling the EU Member States to support businesses and workers affected by the pandemic (all 30%). In France, this item comes first jointly with “Establishing a European strategy for facing a similar crisis in the future” (both 30%). It comes in second position in four countries, including Romania where it is joint second with “Investing more money to develop treatments and vaccines” (both 24%). It is the third most given answer in Sweden (40%) and Greece (33%).

Establishing a strategy for facing a similar crisis in the future ranks first in Luxembourg (43%) and France (30%). It ranks second in eight countries, with the highest proportions in Sweden (44%) and Denmark (42%). It shares second place with “Developing a European health policy” in Bulgaria (both 29%), and with “Supporting a global response to coronavirus to ensure universal access to a vaccine or treatment” in Ireland (both 33%). It is the third most important priority in three countries (in Malta, joint third with “Investing more money to develop treatments and vaccines”).

In third place at EU level with 27% of answers, developing a European health policy is in first position in Cyprus (42%) and Romania (29%). It is the second most mentioned priority in five Member States (including France, where it is joint second with “Investing more money to develop treatments and vaccines”), and the third priority in five countries.

Invest more money to develop treatments and vaccines is in fourth place at EU level, mentioned by 25% of Europeans overall. It is the first answer given in Spain and Croatia (both 37%). It ranks second in three countries, and third in four (including Cyprus, where it shares third place with “Investing more money in the economy for a sustainable and fair recovery in all the EU Member States”).

Support global response to coronavirus to ensure universal access to a vaccine or treatment is cited by 24% of Europeans, in fifth place. It is the first answer given in Sweden (48%), the second one in two countries and the third answer given in three.

Two items are in equal sixth place at EU level with 23% of mentions: Invest more money in the economy for a sustainable and fair recovery in all the EU Member States and Enable the EU Member States to support businesses and workers affected by the pandemic. Invest more money in the economy for a sustainable and fair recovery in all the EU Member States ranks first in four countries, with the highest proportion in Portugal (45%). It is the second answer given in three countries, and the third one in five, including Ireland where it shares third place with “Enabling the EU Member States to support businesses and workers affected by the pandemic”. In Greece (50%) and Bulgaria (30%), Enabling the EU Member States to support businesses and workers affected by the pandemic is in first place. It ranks second in four countries, and third in another four.

Enforce a stricter control of the external borders of the EU is in second place in Finland (32%), and in third position in three countries.

Other items are mentioned by 15% or less at EU level, and ensure the management and coordination of a stockpile of strategic medical equipment common to the EU Member States is the only one of these items to make the top three in any Member State, in third position in the Netherlands (27%).


32

QA11

Ensu

re ra

pid

acce

ss to

safe

and

effe

ctiv

e va

ccin

es to

all

EU ci

tizen

s

Esta

blish

a E

urop

ean

stra

tegy

for f

acin

ga

simila

r cris

is in

the

futu

re

Deve

lop

a Eu

rope

an h

ealth

pol

icy

Inve

st m

ore

mon

ey to

dev

elop

treat

men

ts a

nd v

accin

es

Supp

ort G

loba

l Res

pons

e to

coro

navi

rus t

o en

sure

univ

ersa

l acc

ess t

o a

vacc

ine

or tr

eatm

ent

Inve

st m

ore

mon

ey in

the

econ

omy

for a

sust

aina

ble

and

fair

reco

very

in a

ll th

e EU

Mem

ber S

tate

s

Enab

le th

e EU

Mem

ber S

tate

s to

supp

ort b

usin

esse

san

d w

orke

rs a

ffect

ed b

y th

e pa

ndem

ic

Enfo

rce

a st

ricte

r con

trol o

f th

e ex

tern

al b

orde

rs o

f the

EU

Ensu

re th

e m

anag

emen

t and

coor

dina

tion

of a

stoc

kpile

of s

trate

gic m

edica

l equ

ipm

ent

com

mon

to th

e EU

Mem

ber S

tate

s

Enco

urag

e th

e re

loca

tion

of in

dust

ries

back

to th

e EU

from

abr

oad

Enco

urag

e co

ordi

natio

n an

d so

lidar

ity b

oth

betw

een

the

EU M

embe

r Sta

tes a

nd w

ith o

ur n

eigh

bour

s

Coor

dina

te p

ossib

le re

stric

tions

to th

e fre

em

ovem

ent o

f peo

ple

betw

een

EU M

embe

r Sta

tes

EU27 36 28 27 25 24 23 23 18 15 14 14 10EURO AREA 37 29 28 26 23 23 23 19 15 15 13 9

NON-EURO AREA 34 26 23 23 28 24 24 13 15 12 14 11BE 43 37 29 12 16 26 22 16 16 24 16 15BG 30 29 29 24 12 30 30 20 15 12 12 9CZ 60 32 15 23 25 21 22 16 17 16 15 7DK 45 42 10 22 41 17 17 25 14 11 14 12DE 40 39 28 22 21 17 16 18 16 18 13 8EE 44 32 17 17 23 33 30 21 20 16 11 13IE 53 33 18 16 33 27 27 22 12 7 15 14EL 33 21 29 26 15 43 50 23 15 4 12 9ES 32 19 26 37 23 29 25 16 11 9 12 8FR 30 30 27 27 21 14 20 26 13 24 15 7HR 28 22 33 37 21 28 29 11 12 11 13 10IT 34 22 33 32 28 25 23 14 15 10 13 11CY 31 26 42 34 10 34 37 21 15 5 10 10LV 40 21 29 11 15 40 33 23 15 10 14 14LT 36 24 28 19 19 19 29 24 16 11 15 15LU 39 43 27 13 18 19 23 15 15 24 21 17HU 34 23 31 21 25 28 30 15 17 11 10 10MT 40 28 25 28 21 31 27 18 12 8 13 10NL 46 39 25 19 22 22 22 13 27 10 17 11AT 34 20 20 20 21 34 28 26 16 21 14 13PL 31 21 23 23 28 27 26 10 13 10 13 12PT 41 34 31 12 28 45 38 11 9 7 13 4RO 24 21 29 24 23 20 20 12 16 12 14 12SI 38 28 33 12 19 31 29 20 15 18 15 14SK 42 22 22 31 21 20 22 25 16 9 10 19FI 61 30 9 16 19 22 19 32 16 11 14 16SE 40 44 10 15 48 18 21 15 18 11 22 7

And what should the European Union now prioritise in its response to the coronavirus pandemic?(MAX. 3 ANSWERS)(%)

1st MOST FREQUENTLY MENTIONED ITEM2nd MOST FREQUENTLY MENTIONED ITEM3rd MOST FREQUENTLY MENTIONED ITEM


33

4. Economic consequences: national results

More than six Europeans in ten think that their country’s economy will recover from the impact of the coronavirus pandemic in 2023 or later (61%). Less than a quarter think that recovery will come in 2022 (23%), and just 5% think that it will be later this year, in 2021. Close to one in ten fear that their country’s economy will never recover from the impact of the pandemic (8%), whereas a very marginal share of Europeans say that it has already recovered (1%). Finally, 2% answer that they don’t know.

A national analysis of results reveals that in all EU Member States, “in 2023 or later” is the most given answer, ranging from 82% in Portugal to 44% in Romania. At least 30% of the population think that their country’s economy will recover in 2022 in Malta (32%), Sweden (31%) and the Netherlands and Italy (both 30%), and more than one in ten are even more optimistic and believe it will do so in 2021 in Romania and Hungary (both 11%).

Conversely, 10% of the respondents or more think that their country’s economy will never recover from the impact of the pandemic in Latvia (17%), Croatia and Poland (both 16%), Slovakia (14%), Bulgaria and Romania (both 12%), France and Slovenia (both 11%), Austria, Czechia, Greece and Hungary (all 10%).


34

5. The EU recovery plan ‘Next generation EU’: national results

A majority of Europeans continue to think that the EU 750 billion euro recovery plan, NextGenerationEU, will be effective in responding to the economic effects of the coronavirus pandemic15 (55%). Close to four in ten think it will not be effective (38%), and 7% say that they don’t know.

A majority of respondents in 24 EU countries think that NextGenerationEU will be effective, with the highest proportions in Malta (83%) and Ireland (77%). Conversely, majorities think that it will not be effective in Finland (57% “not effective” vs 42% “effective”) and Latvia (52% vs 47%), while respondents in Portugal are evenly divided (50% vs 50%).

15 This question was also raised in the Special Eurobarometer 500 on the Future of Europe: https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2256

QA15 The European Union has designed a recovery plan of 750 billion euros,NextGenerationEU, to support the economy through grants and loans. How effective ornot do you think that this measure is to respond to the economic effects of theCoronavirus pandemic?

Very effective7

Fairly effective48Not very effective

31

Not at all effective7

Don't know7

https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2256


35

6. Personal experience of the coronavirus pandemic: trend and national results

Since summer 2020, the way Europeans have coped with the different restrictive measures taken to fight the pandemic has deteriorated: a majority of EU citizens now consider that it was a difficult experience to cope with (40%, +8 percentage points since summer 2020), while less than three in ten say it was “easy to cope with” (29%, -9). The proportion who say that it was “both easy and difficult to cope with” has remained almost unchanged, at 31% (+1).

In more detail, 29% answered that coping with these measures was “fairly difficult” (+4 percentage points), while 11% even say that it was “very difficult to cope with, and even endangering [their] mental and physical health conditions” (+4). Among those who rank their experience positively, 4%, say it was “very easy to cope with, and even an improvement to [their] daily life” (-3), while 25% said it was “fairly easy to cope with” (-6).

A majority of respondents consider that confinement measures were a difficult experience to cope with in 17 countries, most strikingly in Italy (63%, including 15% who say it was “very difficult to cope with, and even endangering your mental and physical health conditions”), Greece (60%, 24%), Portugal (54%, 21%) and Cyprus (50%, 14%). At least one respondent in ten say it was “very difficult to cope with, and even endangering your mental and physical health conditions” in Greece (24%), Portugal (21%) and Slovenia (20%).

Conversely, a majority consider that it was very or fairly easy to cope with this experience in ten countries (down from 16 in summer 2020), with the highest proportions in Finland (66%, including 16% of answers “very easy to cope with, and even an improvement to your daily life”) and the Netherlands (60%/8%) and Estonia (55%/9%). In Czechia, similar equal proportions of respondents found that confinement measures were “both easy

and difficult to cope with” (38%) and “very easy” or “fairly easy to cope with” (38% when aggregated). In Ireland, “both easy and difficult to cope with” and “fairly difficult” or “very difficult to cope with” (aggregated) were mentioned by the same proportion of respondents (41%).

Since summer 2020, the proportion of those who perceive their experience of confinement measures as difficult has increased in all countries but one, most strikingly in Ireland (41%, +24 percentage points), Slovakia (49%, +10), Spain (42%, +13), Italy (63%, +13), Cyprus (50%, +12), Slovenia (42%, +12), Lithuania (29%, +11), France (40%, +10) and Austria (43%, +10). Portugal is the only exception: the answers corresponding to “difficult” have lost ground (54%, -8), but so has “easy” (10%, -9), while the proportion of respondents for whom these measures were “both easy and difficult to cope with” has increased spectacularly (36%, +17).

36

V. ATTITUDES TOWARDS VACCINATION AGAINST COVID-19


37

1. Interest in getting vaccinated against Covid-19: national results

More than four Europeans in ten would like to get vaccinated as a soon as possible - or have already been vaccinated at the time of fieldwork16 - if a vaccine against COVID-19 was authorised by public authorities and available for them (45%), and 20% would like to do so some time in 2021. 21% would prefer to get vaccinated later, and 12% say that they would never get vaccinated, and 2% that they “don’t know”.

16 This item (“I have already been vaccinated”) was introduced on field on 19 February 2021. At that time, 8,278 interviews had already been conducted in the whole EU27 area.

In 21 countries, a majority of respondents would like to get vaccinated as soon as possible or have already been vaccinated, led by Ireland (74%), Denmark (73%) and Sweden (71%). At the other end of the scale, there are six countries where a majority of respondents answered they would like to get vaccinated “later”: Cyprus (40%), Romania (36%), Bulgaria (32%), Hungary (31%), Croatia (30%) and Poland (29%).


38

2. Attitudes to Covid-19 vaccines: EU results

Asked about several statements on vaccines, seven Europeans in ten agree that a vaccine is the only way to end the pandemic (70%, including 35% who “totally agree”, vs 25% who disagree).

That said, a similar proportion also agree that COVID-19 vaccines could have long term side-effects that we do not know yet (67% vs 24%), and more than half say that COVID-19

vaccines are being developed, tested and authorised too quickly to be safe (52% vs 42%). And overall, while a majority agree that they do not understand why people are reluctant to get vaccinated (56%), a strong proportion of Europeans disagree (41%).

Finally, more than two-thirds of Europeans agree that the European Union is playing a key role in ensuring that they can have access to COVID-19 vaccines in their country (69%, including 25% who “totally agree”). Less than a quarter disagree (24%).


39

3. Information on Covid-19 vaccines: EU results

When asked which sources they trust more to give them reliable information on COVID-19 vaccines, two items stand out: more than two-thirds of Europeans mention health professionals, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists (67%), and close to half cite their national health authorities (47%).

A group of five sources is mentioned by less than a fifth of Europeans: people around you (colleagues, friends and family) (19%), the national government (17%), media (television, radio, newspapers) (16%), the regional or local public authorities (14%) and the European Union (13%). Finally, websites (9%) and online social networks (5%) are seen as reliable sources of information about COVID-19 vaccines by less than a tenth of the population.

40

CONCLUSION


41

This Standard Eurobarometer survey reveals that, in the specific context of the coronavirus pandemic, the EU is seen in a more positive light than at any time in the last ten years or more. While close to half of Europeans trust the EU, the highest level since 2008 when the financial and economic crisis began, the EU’s positive image has also reached its highest level since autumn 2009, at 46%. In line with these new highs, support for a European economic and monetary union with one single currency, the euro, has also reached its highest level ever registered, in both the euro area and the EU as a whole.

However, the impact of the coronavirus pandemic is massive on perceptions of the national economy, which have continued to plummet: less than three Europeans in ten now think it is “good”, while more than two-thirds say it is “bad”.

More than a year after the start of the pandemic, health is now seen as the most important issue facing the EU, mentioned by close to four Europeans in ten, after a significant rise since summer 2020. The economic situation comes close behind, mentioned by more than a third, while just over a fifth of respondents cite the state of Member States’ public finances, in third place. Health is also perceived as the first issue at the national level, with 44% of mentions, far above the economic situation, mentioned by a third of respondents, and unemployment, cited by one in four Europeans.

Despite the positive assessments on trust and image of the EU, more than half of Europeans are not satisfied with the measures taken to fight the coronavirus by the European Union, and their national government. Since summer 2020, satisfaction has dropped spectacularly for measures taken by the national government, but by only 2-percentage points for the measures taken by the EU. However, thinking about the EU’s response to the pandemic, more than half of Europeans continue to trust the EU to make the right decisions in the future, despite a slight decrease since summer 2020.

Ensuring rapid access to safe and effective vaccines to all EU citizens, mentioned by more than one in three Europeans, is seen as the first priority for the EU in its response to the coronavirus pandemic.

More than six Europeans in ten believe that the EU will recover from the impact of the coronavirus pandemic in 2023 or later, and close to a quarter think that it will do so in 2022. Close to one in ten are very pessimistic: they think that the EU will never recover from the impact of the pandemic.

More than half of Europeans think that NextGenerationEU, the EU 750 billion euro recovery plan, will be effective.

The way Europeans have experienced the confinement measures has deteriorated since summer 2020: a majority of four Europeans in ten now think it was a difficult experience; just above three in ten think that it was both easy and difficult to cope with, and less than three in ten think that it was easy.

If Covid-19 vaccines were available for them, more than four Europeans in ten would get vaccinated as soon as possible, and further 20% would do so later in 2021. More than a fifth answer “later”, and more than one in ten respondents say they will “never” get vaccinated.

Seven Europeans in ten agree that a vaccine is the only way to end the pandemic, but a similar proportion also consider that COVID-19 vaccines could have long term side-effects that we do not know yet, while more than half say that COVID-19 vaccines are being developed, tested and authorised too quickly to be safe. More than two-thirds of Europeans agree that the


TS1

Technical Specifications

Between the 12th February and the 11th March 2021 (18th March 2021 for countries and territories outside the EU), Kantar on behalf of Kantar Belgium carried out the wave 94.3 of the Eurobarometer survey, on request of the European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication, “Media monitoring and Eurobarometer” Unit.

The wave 94.3 includes the Standard Eurobarometer 94 survey and covers the population of the nationalities of the European Union Member States, resident in each of the 27 Member States and aged 15 years and over.

The Standard Eurobarometer 94 survey has also been conducted in 12 other countries or territories: five candidate countries (Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Turkey), the Turkish Cypriot Community in the part of the country that is not controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus, as well as in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Kosovo17, Norway, Switzerland and in the United Kingdom.

In these countries and territories, the survey covers the national population of citizens and the population of citizens of all the European Union Member States that are residents in these countries and territories and have a sufficient command of the national languages to answer the questionnaire.

The basic sample design applied in all countries and territories is a multi-stage, random (probability) one. In each country, a number of sampling points was drawn with probability proportional to population size (for a total coverage of the country) and to population density.

In order to do so, the sampling points were drawn systematically from each of the "administrative regional units", after stratification by individual unit and type of area. They thus represent the whole territory of the countries surveyed according to the EUROSTAT NUTS II (or equivalent) and according to the distribution of the resident population of the respective nationalities in terms of metropolitan, urban and rural areas.

In each of the selected sampling points, a starting address was drawn, at random. Further addresses (every Nth address) were selected by standard "random route" procedures, from the initial address. In each household, the respondent was drawn, at random (following the "closest birthday rule"). If no one answered the interviewer in a household, or if the respondent selected was not available (not present or busy), the interviewer revisited the same household up to three additional times (four contact attempts in total). Interviewers never indicate that the survey is conducted on behalf of the European Commission beforehand; they may give this information once the survey is completed, upon request.

The recruitment phase was slightly different in the Netherlands and Sweden. In these countries, a sample of addresses within each

17 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/99 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.

areal sampling point (1km2 grid) were selected from the address or population register. The selection of addresses was done in a random manner. Households were then contacted by telephone and recruited to take part in the survey.


TS2

N° P O P ULAT IO N P R O P O R T IO NINTE R VIE W S 15+ E U27

BE Belgium Kantar Belgium 1 060 17/02/2021 05/03/2021 9 188 369 2,45%

BG Bulgaria Kantar TNS BBS S 1 032 12/02/2021 03/03/2021 5 995 194 1,60%

C Z C zechia Kantar C Z 1 100 17/02/2021 22/02/2021 8 956 740 2,39%

DK Denmark Kantar Gallup 1 010 19/02/2021 11/03/2021 4 848 611 1,29%

DE Germany Kantar Deutschland 1 575 12/02/2021 10/03/2021 71 728 398 19,10%

E E E stonia Kantar E mor 1 054 17/02/2021 09/03/2021 1 073 224 0,29%

IE Ireland Kantar Belgium 1 094 17/02/2021 03/03/2021 3 896 482 1,04%

E L Greece Kantar G reece 1 058 12/02/2021 10/03/2021 9 187 524 2,45%

E S S painTNS Investigac ión de Mercados y

O pinión 1 007 12/02/2021 09/03/2021 40 006 943 10,65%

FR France Kantar P ublic F rance 1 020 12/02/2021 04/03/2021 52 732 499 14,04%

HR C roatia Hendal 1 028 15/02/2021 07/03/2021 3 488 460 0,93%

IT Italy Kantar Italia 1 023 12/02/2021 03/03/2021 52 397 331 13,95%

C Y R ep. O f C yprus C YMAR Market R esearch 505 12/02/2021 05/03/2021 734 695 0,20%

LV Latvia Kantar TNS Latvia 1 037 17/02/2021 11/03/2021 1 568 124 0,42%

LT Lithuania TNS LT 1 040 17/02/2021 03/03/2021 2 300 257 0,61%

LU Luxembourg Kantar Belgium 599 18/02/2021 07/03/2021 503 275 0,13%

HU Hungary Kantar Hoffmann 1 054 15/02/2021 03/03/2021 8 351 017 2,22%

MT Malta MIS C O International 535 12/02/2021 11/03/2021 426 055 0,11%

NL Netherlands Kantar Netherlands 1 011 15/02/2021 10/03/2021 14 165 638 3,77%AT Austria Das Ö sterreichische Gallup Institut 1 020 12/02/2021 05/03/2021 7 580 083 2,02%

P L P oland Kantar P olska 1 036 18/02/2021 11/03/2021 32 139 021 8,56%

P T P ortugalMarktest – Marketing, O rganização

e Formação1 100 19/02/2021 08/03/2021 8 869 051 2,36%

R O R omaniaC entrul P entru S tudierea O piniei s i

P ietei (C S O P )1 033 12/02/2021 08/03/2021 16 372 216 4,36%

S I S lovenia Mediana DO O 1 038 17/02/2021 22/02/2021 1 767 202 0,47%

S K S lovakia Kantar C zechia 1 138 12/02/2021 05/03/2021 4 592 379 1,22%

FI F inland Kantar TNS O y 1 102 17/02/2021 22/02/2021 4 488 064 1,20%

S E S weden Kantar S ifo 1 100 12/02/2021 11/03/2021 8 149 850 2,17%

27 409 12/02/2021 11/03/2021 375 506 702 100%*

UK United K ingdom Kantar UK Limited 1 301 23/02/2021 08/03/2021 53 082 345

C Y(tcc)Turkish C ypriot

C ommunityLipa C onsultancy 508 26/02/2021 12/03/2021 233 547

TR Turkey Kantar TNS P iar 1 004 22/02/2021 18/03/2021 62 644 678MK North Macedonia Kantar TNS BBS S 1 043 12/02/2021 26/02/2021 1 736 495ME Montenegro TMG Insights 534 12/02/2021 07/03/2021 510 415R S S erbia TMG Insights 1 035 12/02/2021 08/03/2021 5 966 740A L Albania Index Kosovo 1 067 25/02/2021 06/03/2021 2 344 814

BABosnia and Herzegovina

Kantar TNS BBS S 1 046 18/02/2021 11/03/2021 2 987 440

IS Iceland Gallup Iceland 513 22/02/2021 11/03/2021 289 125X K Kosovo*** Index Kosovo 1 067 26/02/2021 17/03/2021 1 357 100NO Norway Kantar Norway 1 112 23/02/2021 17/03/2021 4 392 175C H S witzerland Demo S C O P E AG 1 104 19/02/2021 10/03/2021 7 259 209

38 743 12/02/2021 18/03/2021 518 310 785

* It should be noted that the total percentage shown in this table may exceed 100% due to rounding** R ecruitments in Belgium, C zechia, G reece, Ireland, Luxembourg, P ortugal and S lovakia are carried out by Kantar Belgium, Kantar C zechia, Kantar G reece, R onin International, Infas , Kantar P ortugal and Kantar S lovakia. Non-probabilistic sample in G reece was randomly drawn from Kantar’s LifeP oints panel.

TO TAL***This designation is without prejudice to positions on status , and is in line with UNS C R 1244/99 and the IC J O pinion on the Kosovo dec laration of independence.

C O UNTR IE S INS T ITUTE SF IE LDW O R K

DATE S

TO TAL E U27


TS3

Consequences of the coronavirus pandemic on fieldwork

Face-to-face interviewing

Where feasible, interviews were conducted face-to-face in people's homes or on their door step and in the appropriate national language. In all countries and territories where face-to-face interviewing was feasible CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing) was used. For all interviews conducted face-to-face, hygiene and physical distancing measures have been respected at all times in line with government regulations, and whenever possible, interviews were conducted outside homes, on doorsteps, to remain in open air and maintain social distance.

Face-to-face and online interviewing

In Greece, Malta, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Sweden, face-to-face interviewing was feasible but it was not possible to reach the target number of face-to-face interviews within the fieldwork period due to the impact of Covid-19 restrictions: many potential respondents are reluctant to open their homes to interviewers, even if they respect hygiene rules and physical distancing, such as wearing masks and using hydroalcoholic gel. Therefore, to hit the target number of interviews within the fieldwork period, additional interviews were conducted online with Computer-Assisted Web Interviewing (CAWI) technique.

Online interviewing In Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland, the UK, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland face-to-face interviews were not feasible at all. Therefore all interviews were conducted online with CAWI technique.

Recruitment for online interviews In the EU

The online design in each country differed based on what was feasible within the fieldwork period. Where feasible, the online sample was based on a probabilistic sample design. Those recruited to the online survey were recruited through a single mobile frame or dual frame Random Digit Dialling (RDD) design. In this way the entire phone owning population in each country had a non-zero chance of being sampled. The choice of whether to use a single mobile frame or dual frame (mobile and landline) was dependent on the countries’ landline infrastructure. Where the landline infrastructure is suitably advanced to support a significant minority of residential households with landline phones a dual frame design is employed. The mix of mobile and landline sample is designed to maximise the representation of the responding sample. The RDD sample for both the mobile and landline sample is drawn from the country’s telephone numbering plan. The landline sample frame is stratified by NUTS3 regions based on their prefix and the mobile by operator before a systematic random sample of numbers is generated proportional in size to the total generatable numbers in each stratum. Respondents were recruited using this sample design in Belgium, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia and Slovakia.

In Finland, Denmark, and Sweden, RDD samples were not used, instead the telephone sample was drawn from the country telephone directory. In these three countries the telephone directories offer comprehensive coverage of the phone owning population, storing both landline and mobile phone numbers for each individual.

In the Netherlands, a proprietary panel called “Nipobase” was used, drawing a random sample from their panel. This panel uses a mix of probability based sampling to recruit panellists and non-probabilistic approaches to maximise representation where the probability based approach under-represents, such as in the

N° O F C AP I N° O F C AW I TO TAL N°INTE R VIE W S INTE R VIE W S INTE R VIE W S

BE Belgium 1 060 1 060BG Bulgaria 1 032 1 032C Z C zechia 1 100 1 100DK Denmark 1 010 1 010DE Germany 1 575 1 575E E E stonia 1 054 1 054IE Ireland 1 094 1 094E L Greece 536 522 1 058E S S pain 1 007 1 007FR France 1 020 1 020HR C roatia 1 028 1 028IT Italy 1 023 1 023C Y R ep. O f C yprus 505 505LV Latvia 1 037 1 037LT Lithuania 1 040 1 040LU Luxembourg 599 599HU Hungary 1 054 1 054MT Malta 344 191 535NL Netherlands 751 260 1 011AT Austria 1 020 1 020P L P oland 1 036 1 036P T P ortugal 1 100 1 100R O R omania 1 033 1 033S I S lovenia 1 038 1 038S K S lovakia 775 363 1 138F I F inland 1 102 1 102S E S weden 216 884 1 100

TO TAL E U27 13 955 13 454 27 409

UK United K ingdom 1 301 1 301

C Y(tcc)Turkish C ypriot

C ommunity508 508

TR Turkey 1 004 1 004MK North Macedonia 1 043 1 043ME Montenegro 534 534R S S erbia 1 035 1 035A L Albania 1 067 1 067

BABosnia and Herzegovina

1 046 1 046

IS Iceland 513 513X K Kosovo* 1 067 1 067NO Norway 1 112 1 112C H S witzerland 1104 1 104

TO TAL 21 259 17 484 38 743

C AP I : C omputer-Assisted P ersonal interviewingC AW I : C omputer-Assisted W eb interviewing

C O UNTR IE S

*This designation is without prejudice to positions on status , and is in line with UNS C R 1244/99 and the IC J O pinion on the Kosovo dec laration of independence.


TS4

younger age groups. Nipobase uses mix of offline and online modes. Offline modes are typically RDD samples and online modes are typically recruitment via targeted websites and social media platforms.

Outside the EU:

In the UK, recruitment of respondents was made either via a face-to-face CAPI mode of data collection based on a clustered multistage random sample of addresses or via a postal invite to an online survey using a completely unclustered random sample of addresses.

In Norway and Iceland, stratified random samples were drawn from among probability based samples. Recruitments are done using offline modes of data collection (telephone and postal) based on a probability sample design.

In Switzerland samples were randomly drawn from the non-probabilistic sample (“Demoscope”). Demoscope is a pseudo-probabilistic sample, in that the frame for selecting households is based on a probability sample. Recruitment is done via the telephone directory – which lists landline numbers only in Switzerland, where landline coverage is very high. However the selection of individuals in the households to join the panel is not random. Demoscope was used as the primary source.

Please note that for some countries where the response rates were not sufficiently large to achieve the target sample size in the fieldwork period, we had to further supplement the samples drawn probabilistically (either face-to-face or phone-to-web) with non-probabilistic panels. This was effectively a ‘last resort’ option when no other probabilistic design was feasible.

In Greece, the sample was supplemented with a randomly drawn sample from Kantar’s LifePoints non-probabilistic sample panel; in Lithuania, from Norstat’s panel. The LifePoints panel is Kantar’s proprietary panel, used exclusively for Kantar clients and the lead source for Kantar’s online work, generating close to 30 million completes per year. Members are recruited via online advertising across a wide range of web and social media sites. Adverts are placed with websites with very high footfalls to ensure maximised reach. In Switzerland, Dynata was used to supplement Demoscope due to the shortfall in the younger age groups on the Demoscope sample.

Response rates

For each country a comparison between the responding sample and the universe (i.e. the overall population in the country) is carried out. Weights are used to match the responding sample to the universe on gender by age, region and degree of urbanisation. For European estimates (i.e. EU average), an adjustment is made to the individual country weights, weighting them up or down to reflect their 15+ population as a proportion of the EU 15+ population.

The response rates are calculated by dividing the total number of complete interviews with the number of all the addresses visited, apart from ones that are not eligible but including those where eligibility is unknown. For Standard Eurobarometer 94, the response rates for the EU27 countries, calculated by Kantar, are:

BE** 27,8% LU** 27,3%BG* 45,3% HU* 60,7%CZ** 60,3% MT* 80,6%DK** 15,1% MT** 46,5%DE* 18,4% NL* 53,3%EE** 24,0% NL** 49,4%IE** 24,7% AT* 42,7%EL* 31,5% PL* 42,3%EL** 35,8% PT* 67,4%ES* 32,8% RO* 58,5%FR* 30,2% SI** 53,2%HR* 54,3% SK* 58,7%IT* 22,5% SK** 47,6%CY* 40,7% FI** 28,1%LV** 23,3% SE* 57,6%LT** 26,1% SE** 43,6%* CAPI ** CAWI without taking into account

recruitment phase (for EL, only probabilistic sample)


TS5

Margins of error

Readers are reminded that survey results are estimations, the accuracy of which, everything being equal, rests upon the sample size and upon the observed percentage. With samples of about 1,000 interviews, the real percentages vary within the following confidence limits:

various sample sizes are in rows various observed results are in columns

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

N=50 6,0 8,3 9,9 11,1 12,0 12,7 13,2 13,6 13,8 13,9 N=50

N=500 1,9 2,6 3,1 3,5 3,8 4,0 4,2 4,3 4,4 4,4 N=500

N=1000 1,4 1,9 2,2 2,5 2,7 2,8 3,0 3,0 3,1 3,1 N=1000N=1500 1,1 1,5 1,8 2,0 2,2 2,3 2,4 2,5 2,5 2,5 N=1500

N=2000 1,0 1,3 1,6 1,8 1,9 2,0 2,1 2,1 2,2 2,2 N=2000

N=3000 0,8 1,1 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6 1,7 1,8 1,8 1,8 N=3000

N=4000 0,7 0,9 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,5 1,5 1,5 N=4000

N=5000 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,3 1,4 1,4 1,4 N=5000

N=6000 0,6 0,8 0,9 1,0 1,1 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,3 1,3 N=6000

N=7000 0,5 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 1,1 1,1 1,1 1,2 1,2 N=7000

N=7500 0,5 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 1,0 1,1 1,1 1,1 1,1 N=7500

N=8000 0,5 0,7 0,8 0,9 0,9 1,0 1,0 1,1 1,1 1,1 N=8000

N=9000 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 0,9 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 N=9000

N=10000 0,4 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,9 0,9 1,0 1,0 1,0 N=10000

N=11000 0,4 0,6 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,9 0,9 0,9 0,9 0,9 N=11000

N=12000 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,9 0,9 0,9 0,9 N=12000

N=13000 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,9 0,9 N=13000

N=14000 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,8 N=14000

N=15000 0,3 0,5 0,6 0,6 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,8 0,8 0,8 N=15000

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

Statistical Margins due to the sampling process

(at the 95% level of confidence)


TS6

Documents

Standard Eurobarometer 94 Public opinion in the European Union