HKU POP releases first part of Macau annual survey 2015Back

 

Press Release on December 18, 2015

| Detailed Findings (Macau annual survey) |

| Detailed Findings (Macau Studies Feature Page) |


Special Announcement

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.hku.hk) the raw data of all 86 regular rating surveys of CE CY Leung, as well as the 181 regular rating surveys of former CE Donald Tsang and 239 regular rating surveys of former CE CH Tung, along with related demographics of respondents. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.


Abstract

Hong Kong and Macau differ a lot, the figures of their public sentiments cannot be directly compared. However, within the survey series conducted by POP in Macau, they themselves can be compared. Between 8 and 9 December 2015, POP interviewed 510 Macau people by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers, and found that the popularity of Macau CE Chui Sai On has not changed much as compared to one year ago. His support rating now stands at 57.5 marks, with net popularity of negative 4 percentage points. For the Macau SAR Government, compared to one year ago, its net satisfaction rate has risen to positive 6 percentage points. As for the specific policy areas, in terms of net satisfaction rate, five out of six areas register positive figures. Their rankings are: Relation with the Central Government at positive 53 percentage points, performance of Macau law enforcement departments at positive 40 percentage points, maintaining economic prosperity at positive 22 percentage points, protection of human rights and freedom at positive 17 percentage points and developing democracy at positive 2 percentage points, while improving people’s livelihood at zero. Looking back at 2015, Macau people’s appraisal on the city’s overall development has dropped significantly, with net satisfaction rate plunges to positive 19 percentage points, which is the worst figure since the survey began in 2005. Those who expect next year’s development on societal level to get better have also dropped significantly to 25%, while those who expect the situation to get worse rise to 33%, giving a negative net optimism again since 2008, now at negative 8 percentage points, meaning that people are pessimistic about the next year’s development. Besides, if people have to choose between having a prosperous, corruption-free, fair, free or welfare society, most people would continue to opt for a corruption-free society. The maximum sampling error of all percentage figures is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figures and net values need another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 66%.

Points to note:

[1] The address of the “HKU POP SITE”is http://hkupop.hku.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.

[2] The sample size of this survey is 510 successful interviews, not 510 x 66.1% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.

[3] The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. When quoting these figures, journalists can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-1.9, of percentages not more than +/-4% and of net values not more than +/-8% at 95% confidence level”. Because POP introduced “rim weighting” in 2015 for this survey series, during the transition period, whether changes in various figures are beyond sampling errors are based on tests using the same weighting methods. That is, to test whether the first set of figures collected in 2015 is significantly different from that of the previous survey, both sets of data are rim weighted before testing, instead of using simple computation of the published figures.

[4] Because of sampling errors in conducting the survey(s) and the rounding procedures in processing the data, the figures cannot be too precise, and the totals may not be completely accurate. Therefore, when quoting percentages of the survey(s), journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used.

[5] The data of this survey is collected by means of random telephone interviews conducted by real interviewers, not by any interactive voice system (IVS). If a research organization uses “computerized random telephone survey” to camouflage its IVS operation, it should be considered unprofessional.


Background Information

Since 1992, POP has been conducting onsite studies in Macau in order to study the development of its public sentiment. Among them, most are related to election studies and opinion testing. Up to now, these research projects include Macau Legislative Assembly Exit Polls (1992, 1996, 2001, 2005 and 2009), Macau handover and year-end review surveys (since 1999), and other feature studies.

After the sovereignty of Hong Kong and Macau returned to China, the development of public sentiment in the two cities has become more inter-related. One can expect that Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Macau, Zhuhai and the whole Pearl River Delta will soon merge to become one entity both economically and culturally. Therefore, in the long run, establishing a common social indicator in this region is a “multiple-win situation” for all. POP’s research in Macau in the last 23 years is aimed at gradually building up a regional system on scientific public opinion polling, and to provide useful data for comparative studies in future.


Latest Figures

POP today releases via the “POP SITE” the first part of the Macau annual survey 2015, while the second part will be released on January 7, 2016. From 2015, POP enhanced the previous simple weighting method based on age and gender distribution to “rim weighting” based on age, gender and education (highest level attended) distribution for this survey series. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Statistics and Census Service of Macau government regarding the gender-age distribution of the Macau population in 2014 year-end and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey

Sample base

Overall response rate

Maximum sampling error of percentages[6]

8-9/12/2015

510

66.1%

+/-4%

[6] Errors are calculated at 95% confidence level using full sample size. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified.


I. Popularity figures of Macau CE and the Government

Recent popularity figures of Macau CE Chui Sai On and people’s satisfaction of the overall performance of the MSAR Government are summarized as follows:

Date of survey

17/11-9/12/11

23 -28/12/12

6-12/12/13

1-3/12/14

8-9/12/15

Latest change

Sample base

1,022

519

511

502

510

--

Overall response rate

71.7%

70.6%

69.6%

66.5%

66.1%

--

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding and error[7]

--

Rating of CE Chui Sai On

62.7

64.5[8]

61.1[8]

56.2[8]

57.5+/-1.9

+1.3

Vote of confidence in CE Chui Sai On

44%

51%[8]

39%[8]

38%

39+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in CE Chui Sai On

36%

28%[8]

39%[8]

42%

43+/-4%

+1%

Net approval rate

8%

23%[8]

0%[8]

-4%

-4+/-8%

--

Satisfaction rate of SARG performance[9]

50%

49%

41%[8]

35%[8]

34+/-4%

-1%

Dissatisfaction rate of SARG performance[9]

17%

14%

26%[8]

34%[8]

28+/-4%

-6%

Net satisfaction rate

33%

35%

15%[8]

2%[8]

6+/-7%

+4%

Mean value[9]

3.3

(Base=1,015)

3.4

(Base=519)

3.1[8]

(Base=511)

2.9[8]

(Base=501)

3.0+/-0.1

(Base=507)

+0.1

[7] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-1.9, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net values not more than +/-8 at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.

[8] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

[9] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.


The latest survey showed that, CE Chui Sai On scored 57.5 marks, 39% supported him as CE and 43% opposed, giving him a net approval rate of negative 4 percentage points. Regarding people’s appraisal of the overall performance of the Macau SAR Government, the latest figures revealed that 34% were satisfied, whereas 28% were dissatisfied, giving a net satisfaction of positive 6 percentage points. The mean score is 3.0, which is “half-half”.

Recent figures on Macau people’s appraisal of the six specific policy areas of the Macau SAR Government, and towards Central Government’s policy on Macau since the Handover are tabulated as follows:


Date of survey[10]

23 -28/12/12

6-12/12/13

1-3/12/14

8-9/12/15

Latest Change

Sample base

519

511

502

510

--

Overall response rate

70.6%

69.6%

66.5%

66.1%

--

Finding[11]

Finding]

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[12]

--

Relation with the Central Government: Satisfaction rate

62%

66%

64%

57+/-4%

-7%

Relation with the Central Government: Dissatisfaction rate

6%

6%

7%

5+/-2%

-2%

Net satisfaction rate

56%

60%

57%

53+/-5%

-4%

Mean value

3.7

(Base=446)

3.8

(Base=449)

3.7

(Base=465)

3.7+/-0.1

(Base=444)

--

Performance of Macau law enforcement departments (including the Judicial Police): Satisfaction rate

51%

47%

54%[13]

54+/-4%

--

Performance of Macau law enforcement departments (including the Judicial Police): Dissatisfaction rate

17%

24%[13]

17%[13]

14+/3%

-3%

Net satisfaction rate

34%

23%[13]

36%[13]

40+/-6%

+4%

Mean value

3.3

(Base=511)

3.2

(Base=499)

3.4[13]

(Base=490)

3.4+/-0.1

(Base=490)

--

Maintaining economic prosperity: Satisfaction rate

62%

61%

51%[13]

44+/-4%

-7%[13]

Maintaining economic prosperity: Dissatisfaction rate

11%

13%

23%[13]

22+/-4%

-1%

Net satisfaction rate

51%

47%

29%[13]

22+/-7%

-7%[13]

Mean value

3.6

(Base=510)

3.5

(Base=508)

3.3[13]

(Base=498)

3.2+/-0.1

(Base=503)

-0.1

Protecting human rights and freedom: Satisfaction rate

39%

41%

38%

40+/-4%

+2%

Protecting human rights and freedom: Dissatisfaction rate

18%

21%

23%

23+/-4%

--

Net satisfaction rate

21%

20%

15%

17+/-7%

+2%

Mean value

3.2

(Base=473)

3.2

(Base=482)

3.1

(Base=478)

3.1+/-0.1

(Base=469)

--

Pace of democratic development: Satisfaction rate

33%

28%[13]

27%

32+/-4%

+5%

Pace of democratic development: Dissatisfaction rate

23%

31%[13]

36%[13]

30+/-4%

-6%

Net satisfaction rate

10%

-3%[13]

-9%

2+/-7%

+11%

Mean value

3.1

(Base=463)

2.9 [13]

(Base=458)

2.8

(Base=465)

2.9+/-0.1

(Base=458)

+0.1

Improving people’s livelihood:

Satisfaction rate

44%

37%[13]

34%

34+/-4%

--

Improving people’s livelihood: Dissatisfaction rate

23%

34%[13]

42%[13]

34+/-4%

-8%[13]

Net satisfaction rate

21%

3%[13]

-9%[13]

0+/-7%

+9%

Mean value

3.2

(Base=504)

3.0 [13]

(Base=507)

2.8[13]

(Base=495)

2.9+/-0.1

(Base=502)

+0.1

Central Government’s policy on Macau since the Handover: positive evaluation

72%

66%[13]

64%

63+/-4%

-1%

Central Government’s policy on Macau since the Handover: negative evaluation

3%

7%[13]

7%

5+/-2%

-2%[13]

Net evaluation rate

69%

60%[13]

57%

58+/-5%

+1%

Mean value

3.9

(Base=502)

3.8

(Base=491)

3.7

(Base=488)

3.8+/-0.1

(Base=489)

+0.1

[10] The frequency of this series of questions is different from that of CE popularity and SARG overall performance. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals.

[11] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[12] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.

[13] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.


Of the 6 specific policy areas, people were most satisfied with the government’s handling of its relation with the Central Government, with a net satisfaction rate of positive 53 percentage points. The performance of Macau law enforcement departments (including the Judicial Police) followed, attaining a net satisfaction rate of positive 40 percentage points. The government’s performance in maintaining economic prosperity attained a net satisfaction rate of positive 22 percentage points, while the government’s performance in protecting human rights and freedom attained a net satisfaction rate of positive 17 percentage points. Finally, the net satisfaction rates of the government’s performance in developing democracy and improving people’s livelihood attained the net satisfaction rates of positive 2 and 0 percentage points respectively. The mean scores of these 6 specific areas are 3.7, 3.4, 3.2, 3.1, 2.9 and 2.9 respectively, meaning in between “quite satisfied” and “half-half” in general. Meanwhile, 63% of the respondents evaluated positively on the policy of the Central Government on Macau after the handover, whereas 5% gave negative evaluations giving net value of positive 58 percentage points. The mean score is 3.8 marks, meaning close to “quite satisfied”.

II. Macau people’s 2015 review and 2016 forecast

Herewith the figures of Macau people’s 2015 year-end review and 2016 forecast, compared with similar figures obtained in recent years:

Date of survey

17/11-9/12/11

23 -28/12/12

6-12/12/13

1-3/12/14

8-9/12/15

Latest change

Sample base[14]

1,022

519

511

502

510

--

Overall response rate

71.7%

70.6%

69.6%

66.5%

66.1%

--

Latest finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[15]

--

Satisfied with Macau’s development in the year past[16]

70%

69%

62%[17]

56%[17]

41+/-4%

-15%[17]

Dissatisfied with Macau’s development in the year past[16]

7%

8%

12%[17]

16%[17]

22+/-4%

+6%[17]

Net satisfaction rate

63%

61%

50%[17]

40%[17]

19+/-7%

-21%[17]

Mean value[16]

3.7

(Base=566)

3.7

(Base=513)

3.5 [17]

(Base=508)

3.4

(Base=498)

3.2+/-0.1

(Base=496)

-0.2[17]

Expected Macau’s development to be better next year

--

55%

55%

34%[17]

25+/-4%

-9%[17]

Expected Macau’s development to be worse next year

--

11%

7%[17]

29%[17]

33+/-4%

+4%[17]

Net optimism

--

45%

49%

5%[17]

-8+/-7%

-13%[17]

Wished Macau to become a:

Corruption-free society

28%

33%[17]

40%[17]

38%

34+/-4%

-4%

Welfare society

21%

20%

15%[17]

15%

20+/-4%

+5%[17]

Prosperous society

17%

17%

17%

18%

19+/-4%

+1%

Fair society

22%

22%

20%

20%

18+/-3%

-2%

Free society

9%

5%[17]

6%

7%

7+/-2%

--[17]

[14] The frequency of this series of questions is different for different questions. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals.

[15] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% and of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.

[16] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[17] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.


Looking back at the year past, 41% said they were satisfied with Macau’s development, 22% were dissatisfied, with a net satisfaction rate of positive 19 percentage points. The mean score is 3.2, which is close to “half-half”. Meanwhile, 25% expected Macau’s development in general to become “better” next year, 33% said it would be worse, giving a net optimism of negative 8 percentage points. If one had to choose between a “prosperous”, “corruption-free”, “fair”, “free”, and “welfare” society, 34% of the respondents would wish Macau to become a “corruption-free” society, while 20% and 19% opted for a “welfare” and “prosperous” society respectively.


Commentary

Frank Wai-Kin Lee, Research Manager of Public Opinion Programme, observed, “Hong Kong and Macau differ a lot, the figures of their public sentiments cannot be directly compared. However, within the survey series conducted by POP in Macau, they themselves can be compared. According to our annual survey completed in early December, the popularity of Macau CE Chui Sai On has not changed much as compared to one year ago. His support rating now stands at 57.5 marks, with net popularity of negative 4 percentage points. For the Macau SAR Government, compared to one year ago, its net satisfaction rate has risen to positive 6 percentage points. As for the specific policy areas, in terms of net satisfaction rate, five out of six areas register positive figures. Their rankings are: Relation with the Central Government at positive 53 percentage points, performance of Macau law enforcement departments at positive 40 percentage points, maintaining economic prosperity at positive 22 percentage points, protection of human rights and freedom at positive 17 percentage points and developing democracy at positive 2 percentage points, while improving people’s livelihood at zero. Looking back at 2015, Macau people’s appraisal on the city’s overall development has dropped significantly, with net satisfaction rate plunges to positive 19 percentage points, which is the worst figure since the survey began in 2005. Those who expect next year’s development on societal level to get better have also dropped significantly to 25%, while those who expect the situation to get worse rise to 33%, giving a negative net optimism again since 2008, now at negative 8 percentage points, meaning that people are pessimistic about the next year’s development. Besides, if people have to choose between having a prosperous, corruption-free, fair, free or welfare society, most people would continue to opt for a corruption-free society.”


Future Releases (Tentative)

  • December 22, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Hong Kong people’s ethnic identity
  • December 23, 2015 (Wednesday) 1pm to 2pm: Trust and confidence indicators