106
- .
Tbc S t a d d E U R O B A R O ~ No.41 SuNey was padcrralrm ktwcar 4th April a d 6th May 1994, just before the Juac 1994 European Elections.
*
o
o
.
HIGHLIGHTS
support for Eu m~mbenhrp continues a thr# year fal from its all-time high ia Spring 1991 (thcn: 72% "EC membenhip is a goo6 thing', now 'EU(EC)' 54%).
However, r+ pcrccntage of people who pcrccivc benefits in their courxxy's membership of the European Union consolidates at tht EU12 level (47% "bf i t ' ; 34% 'not benefit') afur a similar drop, while Spain and Fraqct comime to fall.
Only half tttc cltctorate had d y been aware of thc Europeas Mia" ia tht media a month or two before thc 1994 Eun>-Elcction. Tbis comparts witb thrrc- quancn of thc electorate (ECIO) jun befm tk 1984 EurcGlection.
k v e i s of hope (54 96) and fear (35 96) about tk Shglc Marktt continue to hold s r d y since around the time the Single Markct tame into force at tbt kginning of 1993.
There is also no change in rhe infonnation deficit felt by most EU citizens (71% 'oot well/at all infomed") since the height of the Maastricht debate in Spring 1993.
A fiftb (22%) of EU citizens say they have heard of the European Cornmission's Whiu Paper on 'Growrh. Competitiveness. Employment'. Of those who have h e d , two-to-one (51 Sb versus 26%) reskon its effects will be positive ratbCr tbau not.
Over rhe past four years. public suppon for a common defencc and a common forrip policy rox. now rcmaimng ar high levels (75% and 68% rrspcnivtly). populu baclung for che European Central Bank has been incrwsing over the same period (now: 65%). Opposition to che single cumncy may have boaomed out (support m w at 53%).
Four ail of un EU CIULCN (42%) can speak the English language. Tbtn comc German (31%) and Frcnch (29%) . 7l-c ability to converse b a foreign language conunues to grow. More than twice as many young people than old pcopie have lcarned a foreign language and can convene m it.
Despite economic recession. high unemployment a d otber bad ~yws. elght aut of en EU cirizens 0 9 % ) say they arc 'on thc whole satisfied with tht life they lead'. Only a f f i (20%) feel disausfial. R e c l ~ l y h e same result was rrgisttrtd twtmy y a n ago in the EC9. , .
-.. .. ..
. - -
. . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . , . . . . - .
. - - . . . . ~ - . . . . . . .
.. . ~ . _ .
. . . . - . . _ - -_ - . :. . . .
- - . .
-fi- . _ . . . NOTE .
Until EUROBAROMETER No 31, su~cys wcre carried out by narional imimres bcloqging to 'European Omnihu Surveys' (EOS). 'Faits et Opinions', Paris, wu rrspondblc for fdisation of qumionnairrs ( w o w with thc Commission's 'Surveys, Rcscuch, Andysd Unit), international coordiriarion and thc initial statistical processing of tk dm. 'Ibt EB nuvcys b m No. 32 onwards have bctn Canied arct by natiod insthes h t c d with tk "INRA (EUROPE) European Coordination office'.
All institutes involved wert sclccttd by e d e r . They arc al) members of tk 'Europcm Society for Opinion and Marketing Research" (ESOMAR) a d camply with ia stadudS.
The fim given for the Eumptan Union as a whole, which arc shown in this dua"& arc weighted on the basis of the adult population in eacb couzIfly. In certain cucs, tht U d ' percentage in a table does not always add up exactly to 10046, but a numba v a y clow to it (e.g. 99 or lol), becaw of mundmg. When questions allow for s e d v, percentages also ofun add up to more than 100% as well. Perccnrages shown in tk onphia may d q l a y a di!Yerrncc of Ik compared to the tables because of tk way "sly- munded percentages arr: added.
In accordance with normal practice for h typc of survey, tbc Europun Comrmtsr * 'O0 disclaims all responsibility for questions. rtsults and commentaries. This report, whicb ~ 8 8 drawn up by the Survey Rrscarrh U M of tbc Dirtctorau-Gencral for Momutb. Communiution. Culw. Audiovlsual is an imtrnal workmg document of tk h w p a n Commission.
.
Tbt lutst venion of EUROBAROh4EIER TRENDS was pbl iskd e. It COVQI I :
inchuje all surveys up to nzndard EUROBAROK€X€R No.40 (A" 1993). & of &ort and long tcrm modt. romc of whichgo b8Ck to 1962. Tk kpcrropdltt ,
. .
i
..-. . . . . . . . . . . - - - - . . . . . . . .- -- .... . . . . . . . . . . - -. . - . .' - .
. .
..E-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. DEMOCRACY AND THE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS: JUNE 1994
1.1 Thc~ocraticdeficit ........................... .-I.. ..... 1
1.2 Whoshouldkallowedtovotc? ............................. 3
1.3 AwarencssofthcEuropcanpariia"&thcelcctionS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Possible factors influemkg tk voe ........................... 5
1.5 ThcpowcrsofthcEuropeanParlia" ........................ 7
2. THE EUROPEAN UNION TODAY
2.1 berest and infomrdraccc about t#e Union ....................... 9
2.2 Public suppon for European integration ....................... 10
2.3 The "bDynamometer" ............................... 27
2.4 The Gnek Presidency .................................. 27 .
3. EUROPEAN POLICY AREAS
3.1 The White Paper: "Growth. Competitiveness, Employment" . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.2 The Single Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.3 Political and monetary integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.4 Subsidiariry, national and EU policy domains .................... 31
4. 0- DIMENSIONS OF EUROPE
4.1 Satisfaction with life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : ..... 35
4.2 Proficiency in languages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 . ',
..-. . .
. .
TABLEOFCONTENTS .
ANNEXES
. . . -..* . .
D E T ~ ON *WORK AND SAMPLING ....................... ~2 .
S& EUROBARO- SuNey NO.41 April-May 19W by -Europe
L I S T O F G R A P H I C S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A6
LISTOFTABES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A8
TABLES .............................................. Al l
SURVEYS ON AlTKlDES OF EUROPEANS ..................... A41
TECHNICAL SPECmCAnONS FOR SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC ANDsocIo-PoLITIcALvARIABLEs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Asz -,
. .
- .. . . . . . . >
7 . . . . . . . . .i
e
.. .b ... ..... ..
- v -
The European Community has become the. European Union
introductory note
... on the impact of changing an 'mrportant word in a question on the answershesults of an opinion poll - with particular attention to comparison over time and between dHerent countries.
I i
As of November 1 st; 1993, the -European Community" changed its name to the "European Union" on the occasion of the "Maastricht Treaty coming into force. The media in most countries immediately applied this change of name and ever since speak of the "European Union". Nevertheless, for the person in the street, this change of denomination is not necessarily obvious and self-evident.
In any case, EUROBAROMETER surveys have to take the new situation into account. Just as, in the 1970s, when EUROBAROMETER interviewers addressed people interviewed by speaking of "the European Community (Common Market)', we now have interviewers speak of "the European Union (European Community)".
As is well known, public opinion poll results, e.g. percentage distributions of answers, may be (and most of the times indeed are) quite different as soon as the same issue is addressed with different question wording and/or replies offered. This applies also if only one of the key terms changes in an otherwise identical set of question-cum-replies offered'.
If one wants to measure the "real' change of public opinion over time, one must keep the wordmg of one's question (as well as the wording and format of the replies offered) fully identical. Different results obtained at t w o different points in time may otherwise be either due t o a real change in public opinion or simply due to the difference in question wording (and/or format). In order t o find out 'how much' of the difference in results is due to question wording, the method of the so called 'split ballot' is used: for half of the sample the unchanged wording ir
1 As any introdunton into 'what is an op imn poll and how it ir dor" ramindr, tt" U I funher causes for vuiauon in disaibubonr of anawera, lika plaamant of panicular quesuon in the interview/quumonruira ud, relatad to thir. contents at precsdtng topics addressed: consciout or rub-consaour rtyb of ¡Me&W¡ng bv th. interwewer. etc. ett.
. .
- v i -
- MEMBERSHIP GOOD MING OR BAD THING? - "EP BY COUNTRY - SPRING 1994
K
L I
m om
D w
n m
7 7
BENEFIT OF MEMBERSHIP - 'EC BY COUNTRY - SPRING 1994 w w u r -
- v i i -
used, for the other half a new wordingkey term is used. This was done in the Eurobarometer survey no.41 foc two "items' of the quedon addressing &hems' views as t o which political domains ought to be dealt with at the national levels . and which ones rather should be dealt with at the common European level: defence and (un)employment (see the following report, p.33).
This technique of the 'split ballot' was also used with respect t o one 'key' word in EUROBAROMETER surveys: 'European Community" (¡.e. the ."traditional' nomination over many years) versus 'European Union'. More precisely, t o help respondents remember that .the.subject of .the. question. has a new name: "European Union (European Community)'.
-
The result is shown in Figs. El-E2 (see also Tables 14b+c and 15b+c) for just two out of many questions: support for EC or EMEC) 'MEMBERSHIP' of one's country and perceived "BENEFIT" of this membership for one's country.
Since not only a key word in question wording has changed but also the object of the question itself - as the post-Maastricht EU is, as such, different from the pre- Maastricht-EC and as this very change has been welcomed in different Member States with different degrees and substance matter of public controversy and debate - things are even more complicated: the object itself has changed; public debate about this change varied across countries and people's opinion about it either changed or did not.
This means: we cannot distinguish the reasonslcauses behind different (distributions of) answers, with respect to whether we use the term 'European Community" versus the term "European Union (European Community)' at present. All we can do for the moment is : (a) repofl the impact of the different W m u on answering patterns as compared to answers to 'European Community' exclusively used in the EUROBAROMETER survey of six months earlier (October 1993), i.e. including in a non separable way the change of public opinion about "The Twdvo' over time, (b) present some preliminary reasoning about likely important reasonskauses, and ( c l clearly give a serious waming for everybody reading tho following report - text as well as graphics and tables - : beware ! All r esub of questions containing the name of the Twelve, are a combination of both halfs of this 'split ballot' i.e., in principle, the answers of people asked in terms of "European Community' added up together with the answers of people asked the otherwise identical questions- terms of 'European Union (European Community)'.
Only here, in this technical introduction do we, for two questions, show the difference between the 'EC' half and the 'EU(EC)" half of our split ballot.
. .
. .
. - -'viii- -
A detailed methodological researdh dossier is being prepared and will be avahble from the Commission's "Survey Research (EUROEAROMETER) Unit' IDGX.B.7) as
.
0- . . . of October 1994.
From evidence now available, we can report 8 signifiant mndency of 'don't . knows' to increase ( + 5 points for support of 'MEMBERSHIP' + 4 pointr, for
perceived 'BENEFIT') as soon as the new name, i.e. 'European Union' is used instead of 'European Community', In individual countries, .,?his tendency b particularly strong in Germany, Spain and the UK for both indicaors. (A difference in the opposite direction is, however, also found; most significantly in France (for "Membership") and in Italy (for 'Benefit')).
As to the difference for substantive op¡n¡ons e x p r o r d , the 'net support for membership' is, at the overall weighted average for The Twelve level, higher when tho term 'European Community' k used ( + 3 points). This k particularly significant in Germany, Denmark, The Netherlands and Belgium. An effect in the opposite direction is found in France. When looking at the 'benefit' indicætor, the overall difference a the European level is little significani, with a slight t m d e n y to .H more bonsfit when 'EC' is used, as compared to 'EU(EC)' ( + 1 percentage point). mis tendency is more pronounced in Ireland, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark. A notable tendency in the opposite direction is to be found ln Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy.
A first interpretation would underline (a) an increased subjective uncertainty among a part of the public which resub from not being fadlkr with the new num,. combined with /bl an "anti-~sastrkht ' effect among p m of those who andbuts the new n a m , correctly, to the Treaty on European Union, or with (cl at kut some uncertainty as to whether the "new Europe' merits support and/or provider - benefits.
-
- 1 - - E L J R O B A R O ~ 4 1
l i
I -
l. DEMOCRACYANDTHE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS : JUNE 1994
.
On9thand 12th Junt 1994, EU citizclrsturdola-tovott htht Eurpcirrcl 'ans . to .ek 567 deputies m m enlarged Europcanparliamtnt withiacrrased powus, thanks to thc Tmty on Europcan Union.
However, the election also highlighted a worrying mnd - a confinnMion of tbe co- srtady d e c h in voter participation af Eurolleaions, from 63.0% of EC citiztnS ULStiDg votes in the fim Euro-elections held in 1979, tD 61.0% in 1984, 58.5% bl 1989 and DDW
56.5 I.
In tht run-up to thc cuma EurcK1Mionr, satisfaaion with the way dnnocraEy wo* in r k European Union suffered a fall (EU12: 4 "satisfiedm3) compared to the result p U b W in standard EUROBAROMETER report No.40 six months ago (Figure 1.1, Table 1). It now a h o n exady rrpcats thc mult when the question was fim asked ÙI Spring 1993 (00% "satisfied'; 47% "mfid').
Back in Spring 1993, many people coming from the five most pop~dous co&cs in tk European Union had the grratest womes about the democranc deficit at the European level. This time, they arc joined by Greece, whose people now arc fwo-tD-0~1~ dissatisfied. F d with d q u u s concerning its relations with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Maccdonir a d evenu in Bosnia. Greek sausfaaion with EU democracy phunmets by 22 points since sh months ago.
EU citizens are roughly as dissatisfied with their own country's democncy (43% "satisfied"; 53% "dissatisfied") as with the state of EU democracy (4096;48%) (Figure 1.2, Tabie 2)'.
. - : .
.- e
. -
-41--1.1 . .
SATISFACTION WT"H DEMOCRACY IN OWN COU"
l
t I
. - . ..
I =
- 3 - ' EtJROBAROME"ER41
Tbc ItalianGamaI Election of 27/28thMarth 19% which &ngcddu po- h d S C # p . of h t m m , has not maoagcd to aadicate suspicions that 00ct dogged itr old tsfatrlizhmcnt Although tilaSc 'mat all' satisfied have ShaIply dimirkw (-12) this timt a r o u n d , both those 'fairly diss&fled' (+4) pod "y satisfied' (+sl bave egually gained overall, still 77% of Italians say they axe dicutisfial withthr way tkir dull- wo* and only 19% BIT satisfied, still thc mm ntgativc result intht European union. Imds of dusathfaction have done nomorc thanto remm mughly to those registasd as d y (IS
Spring 1992 (EB37: 21% "sarisfied': 76% 'dksatisfiW),
Dissatisfaction with Greex's own democracy has to amud thc levels rrgistcrrd before the 10th October PASOK Gcncial Election victory -9: 34% 'satisfied'; G% "dissatisiied"). Having a mibority govanmcnt a& facsd with corruption zraruialz, Spain's sarisfacton with democracy bas also s u f f d a big drop sirw six months ago (-11 "satisfied"). Overall Grrcks, Sparuards and Imlianc are all more than two-wom dissa- with "the way their own country's democracy works' at ~ I C ament timc.
1.2 Who should be allowed to vote ?
Citizens of a EU m a n k state residing in another EU cou^ should be a!lowed the right to vote at E d e d i o n s (as indeed they wcre for tbc fint time Juac lW), say a large majority of EU citizens (74% "for'; 16% 'against'). la tht approach to the 19w Emxlection, the rrsult is a slight improvement (+3) sipcc six montbs ago. The biggcst swing in support for this idea happens in Greece (+ 12) and Luxemboug (+ 11) ("able 3y. .
-
Two-thirds of EU citizcns also say EU non-aatiods should be d l o d to a d SB mdidates at Eurdections (64% "for'; 24% 'against") - again a three point impmvancnt compared to lm time. with Luxembourgers warming tht most to tht idea (+lo).
EU non-nationals voting at local e l d o n s is also quite a popular proposition (53% 'for'; 37% 'agam'. a slzcable +6 mcftase in apport from last time). Notable k r u s e s ia support come from Luxembourg ( + 14). Gruce ( + 12) and the United %ngdom (+ 10) which revene majonry opposiuon to the idea registered last time in alf rhese thtu cmmries. NOW the= is only clear opposition to the idca in Denmark (39% 'for'; 58% 'api").
BUI allowing EU noo-nationals to stand as candidates in local dsdlons Stirz Iprrm "ance (42% 'for'; 4 6 1 'agamt'). althoughagainthtrrhasbananirvrraK btolaUrr on this issue since lan m e ai the EU level (+3). Again lurrmbgurg regisms thc b w swing in favour ( + I l ) , alrhough there is nill a majority against (43% 'for'; 52% 'agabst.) in that COUDtTy.
0
_ - . .- - - . .. - .
EUROBARO- 41
. . _ .
-'4 *
AWARENESS OF THE DATE OF THE EUROPEAN ELECllONS OF 9/12 JUNE 1994
(CORRECT ANSWERS ONLY)
a
I _
- 5 - EUROBAROMETER 41
@ 13 Awareness of the Eunrpearr puliament & the ele'dionsb
With just a month or two to go before the 1994 Euro-clection~, a r o d half of all EU citizCIls (52%) said they "have h d something rculltly abou! tht European Parliament" in the maih (Table 4). - - ,
Awarrness uf the Europcm p a r i i a " w a s higlzut in factjus! kforetbe I984 Eunwlection (75%). Since then, awarrntss in tbc months before the run-up to thc Eunxiections has become less dramatic ( F i p 1.3).
nte period of thc Maastricht debate saw an uneven but distina inCrtase in a m n e s of tk Europtan parfiament in the media. We shall scc to what degree the European Parliament's new powers will make the mcdia render it more visible to the public for instaacC when tbt new Parliament holds proceedings to approve the Commission in thc Autumn.
Dunng the month of April 1994, when fieldwork for this m e y took place, a " c s s of thc &te of thc forthcoming Eunwlections was not particulariy high. More than thrre- quarun of EU citizens said they did not know the date (59%) or got it m n g (19%) (Fi- 1.4, Table 5).
Of the 22% that got it right, the highen proportion were in Luxembourg (53%) Italy (39%) and Belgium (33%). Those least aware were in the Netherlands (6%). which was in tbc middle of its 3rd May General Election campaign throughout the time of thc survey. I facfor which no doubt bloncd out all thoughts about the Eurcnlection to be held shonly oftcrwuds. The United Kingdom's key 5th May Local Council Elections may have also been a factor in a similar low awareness m u l t (9%) for that country.
Qp 1.4 Possible facton influencing the vote
Of those mundug to vote. most felt national (55%) rather than European (37%) issues w d d play a morr unponant role in rhe way b e y voted (Figure 1.5, Table 6). Only tk Netherlands was there a clear majority (53 2) statmg that European issucs would prcdominatt UI the^ choice. National issues wert iromcally most unponant in those CoUDpies which arc the grrattst per capira beneficianes of European h o n regional aid (P,E.IRL.GR) . Mon people who say they intend to vote think the content of the proposcd policies (58%) will k mon imponant for them when voting, followed by the panies (21%) a d idMchd d i d a x e s (17%) (Table 7). The contem of proposed policies comes fun almost evaywhrr - exaptiom am Pomgal and Ireland (where CO" of proposal policies Md iadiviQll CaDdidates an in joins fim place). as well as Greece (coment of pmposcd policks a d *=).
n O F I L B
ou U
P E
cll aR
=I-
MORE POWER OR N M FOR THE EUROPEAN PARUAMENT3
I
13R F
lM2)
E B U 1 ? 0 R U œ
. . . ' - .
i -
-
- 7 - EUROBAROMETER 41
@ 1.5 The pow- of the European porliament.
More EU &zens would like to see the European Parliament gain in pom (44%) than nat (33%). People coming from counuics bordering tbe Meditcrraecan (I.GR,F,E) arc tk most suppo~ve, while m m ~ t w M o s o c are opposed i n k UnitedKingdm (27%:58%) and Darmark (18%:73%) (Figure 1.6, Table 8).
Thc EU general public supports by oulright majorities thre spc~ifrc gains in power for tbc Eurapcan Parliamcm, largely rrflectcd in the Treaty on tk European Union, namely flable 3, cf. also Table 16 and page 10):
By an ovawhelming 73% to 9% that the President and the members of the European Commircion should have the support of a in the Euro- Pariiament. Otherwise they should d g n . This immrnyly popular m, especially suppotted by Dutch (83%) and Gmnan (81%) citizmS, is expected to k fint tcsted this Au", particularly if the EW Parliamen! decides to conduc! US ccnatr-r~yle hearings for ach Commissioner (although they can only accept or rejest tbc Commission as a whole). Bigpst imcases in support for this~proposal are regkrcd in Iwx~mbourg (+14) and Belgirrm (+ 12) sincc six months ago - and +7 for the Union as a whole (mainly because &osc urho "don't know' decrease).
By 60% to 15%. that the European Community/Union should hare a Emopepn Government responsible to the European patiiament and to the European cormdl of Heads of National Covunment, a 4 point inmaSc in support compartd to last timc. A +17 i n c m in support is registcd in Luxembourg' . By 52% to 20%, that in matters of EC legislation, taxation and upendlture, tbe
European Parliament should have qual rights with the Council of Ministers, d c b represents National Governments. Another +7 inCrraSc in support at the EU level oaxrs, particularly in klg ium (+11) and France (+lo) this time.
-. ....
~EUROBAROME"ER41 - 8 -
SUPPORT AND PERCEIVED BENEFITS . OF EU MEMBERSHIP - EU12 -.
1981 0 1994
MEMBERSHIP W THING'
Ec1 o EC12 EC12+
3 % .
ELRIOBAROMETER 41 - FIGURE 21
. . . . . . . . .
1. .' .*- I
.. e * -
. i . . . I ,
.b * . .
, a,?;
, ': . . .
- 9 - EUROBARO- 41
2. THE EUROPEAN UNION TODAY 2.1 Intvest and info med nes^ about the Union
42% say they arc very/somcwhat intntstcd in Europpl plitia, rhat is to say matten related to the European cOmmunity/Union. By comast 56% say axe not wry/at dl kurrsttd. Thm bas not been any sisnifictnt cbangea the Eulcvel conenning this measurr sincc six m o m ago (Table 9).
Only a majority of Da~cs have a pndomirrant br r s t (71%) in European politia, with a narrow majority of Greeks also intaestcd to some degree (52%).
The perceived information deficit at the EU levd has also not changed sincc lan timc (Table 10). 27% say they k l vmylquitc well infoxmcd about thc European Union, i0 policies, its institutions, while a he@ 71% say they are not very/at all well irrformed. A 10
al) well informed s k six montb ago. Thm has beca no xutuction in tbc pcrcmtagc of those perceiving thtmsclves to k ill-informed at the EU level sia# the hei@ of tk Maasrricht debate (Spring 1993) saw an krcase in thici nrrmkrs from 66% to tk ament 71 5%.
point decrease has OcQllTtd in tht pcxuntage of Ivxcmburgen saying thcy Bn not Vtry/rt
Tbc grratest fiusnations sam to be felt by Greeks, 52% of whom are imnrsted -=QP- politics, but only 23 5% of whom feel adequately informed, tbc laner being tbc secad Lowest result in the Union.
As we saw in the prrvious sfandard EUROBAROMETER report No.40 (Chapter 2). tk mass media kvi tably is where people go to be bener informed about European Union affairs.
'
bokmg ar bow often people UK media in geneal. 75% DOW say they watch tk mms on television "everyday'. while 46% say they rcad daily O C W S ~ ~ ~ K aud the samc perccntagc that they lisun to radio news 'everyday' (Tables 11-13).
Since six months ago 'everyday' TV news-watchmg and radio mws-lisrening went up +4 points, while newspaper-=ding nayed roughly stable (+2). The percentage of thosc watching television nem bas been rising ever since !be EUROBAROMETER frrrt started trxking the subject (Spring 1980: 60% "everyday") and has reached a new high (Spring 1994: 75% "everyday").
Revelations about M s in Spain may be a factor in che high iDcrrasc in everyday u g e of dl t b t e media mgisvrcd over the pan six mo& (TV +9 'everyday'; ndio'+8; O C W ~ K +7) in that c o w .
.
-_ ... .
- EUROBAROMETER 41 - 10- /
c Q 2.2 Public support for Etvopcpn . '
when aska! wkther they are 'for or agaim the formation of a Eumpern Go-
Europcvr Council of tbc H u d s of Narional Govcnrment', d. page f), 50% of EU support thir notion, while 26% opposc. There has b a n a 3 point inCrrast m support rince six momhs ago (Table 16).
Grutest nrppon for the idea comes h m Icalians (68% "for'; 10% *against'). Only h tbt Unitad Kxngdum (31%:47%) and Denmark (21%:67%) is here opposition frofa modt cirirarr.
rrsporrtible to the European Puliamrr" (that is, without adding th woding 'ad m tk
. . .. - . . . . ..-
. .
. .
- 11-0 EUROBARO-41 .
1981 - 1993: "Europ~an &"unity" - Spring 1994: Split half "European Community" for one half of the sampk "European Union
(European Community)" for the other half of the sample
..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i -.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . :- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . .
- - . . ...-. -.. - -- . . - - . - .
- . . . . . . - ' . - . -. . .
_. . . . - -, .
. .
-- . - '
-' 12 - . . m O B A R O e 4 1 4
1981 - 1993: '- Com-tf' - SpMg 19W: SPU haIf -P-- .tyœ for one half of the samplc, '"pan Union
("pein Community)' for tk other half of the sample
HASDENMARKBENEFITEDFROlA EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP)
1983-1994 1
- . .
. : ' . .
. . ..... . . . .
. ... . - .. -. . - ..- L
.- - -. .. . .
. . . . .- . . . - :. : . - ._ -
. . . _ .
. -
~ -13 - EUROBAROMETER41
SUPPORTFORNROeEANUNm MMBERSHIP-OERMANY
1@87-1=
1981 - 1993: "Europ~an C o ~ u a i t y " - Spring 1994: Split half "Eumpeaa Community" for one half of the sample, Zuropean Union
(European Community)" for the other balf of the sample
HAS GERMANY BENEFITED FROM EUROPVIN UNION MEMBERSHIP?
1983-1994 .DI
1
T - - - " - -
.
. r
* .. . -
,.'
EUROBAROMETER 41 - 14-
1981 - 1993: "European Comrmmr 'ty" - spring 1994: split half -El" community" for ollc half of the sampk "Eraopesn unim
(Elmpal community)" for tk otha half of the sample
. .
.. ..
. .
-.
.. .
-u- EUROBAROMETER 41 . .
! - , -
~~
1981 - 1993: " E ~ p t a n Community" - S@g 1994: Split half "Europan Community" for one half of t.he sample, " E m o p p Union
(European Commun~ty)" for the other half of the sampk
HAS GERMANY BENEFITED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP'?
1990-1994 A
I .
EUROBARO- 41 * -16-
SuppORT FOR W E A N UNION
1981 - 1994 - MEMBERSHIP-Qw
A L . 1
1981 - 1993: "Europ~an CommUaity" - Spring 1W: Split half "European Communitym, for one half of tbe sample, "European Unim
(Eumpean Community)" for the other haIf of the sample .
. -.
I -
l =
1 -
- 17- EUROBARO- 41
1981 - 1993: "Eurom Community" - Spring 1994: Split half "European Co".ity" for one half of the sample, "European Union
(European Community)" for the other half of tht sample 4
HAS SPAIN BENEFED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP)
1986- 1994. i
U
o.
3A
A
(A
U *uII
D
---y -- _- . _- _. _ __
-. -. -. . __-
I . - _ _ _ - - - _ - - - . - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " Y€*--
A I / V E - r e a W
I. ._
I-
- ... .
SuppORT FOR EUROPE4N UNION MEMBERSHIP - FRANCE
1881 y l 9 9 4
1981 - 1993: "Eurom Cammunity' - Spring 1994: Split Mf "European Community" for one half of the sample, "European Union
(European Community)' fur the other half of the sample
HAS FRANCE BENERTED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP?
1983-1994 I A 1
- . . . ..
I - l *
I I D I I
I -
I - 19 - -
I SUPPORT FOR €UR& UNION
MEM-HIP - IRELAND 1981 - 1994
I
m
IDI
IR
U
I -41 -CIQIRELlD
1981 - 1993: "E~rop~an Commllnity" - Spring 1994: Split half "European Commun~ty" for one half of the sample, "European Union
(European Community)" for tht other half of tht sample '.
I I HAS IRELAND BENEFED FROM
EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP'? 1903 - 1994
A 1
..
t . - - EURÒBAROMETER 41 - 20 -
n
1981 - 1993: mm 'ty' - spring 1%: split half "European Community" for one half of th sample, "Errropcan Union
(European Community)" for the o k half of thc sample . .-
. .
c
-. , .', .. -..
. . - .. . . .. . . .
. . ' -. . .
. - .. '. ' . . . a . .
. . . .. - .
- ..
. . - . " _ . . . I . - . , . ._
I -
l - I
l -
I _
f . :
- 21 -
.- .- .
EUROBARO- 41
a
1981 - 1993: "European Community" - S@g 1994: Split half "Emopean Gm"mty" for one hau of the sample, "European Union
(Eraopean Communiry)" for thc othcr half of the sample
HAS LUXEMBOURG BENEFITED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIPI
1983 - 1994
- .
. . .
. .
. . .
EUROBAROMETER 41 . -22:
. SUP#WrTFORafROPEANUNlON MEMBERWIP - NEMERUNOS
la61 - 1B94
1981 - 1993: "Esrropean Commrmr 'ty" - spring 1994: split haIf
(European Commtmity)' for the 0th half of the sample Turopam co"unity' for one half of the sample4 union
HAS THE N R H W D S BENERIED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP?
1983-1994 A
- .
. -
. .
. -. . . .. . - . , . .
-. - . . . S.'.
. --
. . . . . .i. 2 f . -
I -
-23- . E U R O B A R O M E ~ 4 1
SU- K)R EUROPEAN UNION MEMBBHIP - PORTUOAL
1981 - 1944.
1981 - 1993: "EIKUW Community" - Smg 1994: Split half "European Community" for one half of the sample, "Europtan union
(European Community)" for tbc other half of the sampk
HAS PORTUGAL BENEFITED FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP?
1986-1994. m
I
1
' . . . .
, ..
. .
. - . z .. . . . - .. . - , - : .. - .
- .. . . .
. . .-- . - - - . . . - . . . .. .
- - . . . ., - .
- . . . . .
kOBAR0-41 - - a-- - . .- . . .
. .
HAS THE UK B E " FROM FROM EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP?
1983-1944
m
Q.
m
a
æu
8
-
. - . .... - - - . .
. . . . . . . .< .
- . - . . - . .
THE 'EURO - DYNAMOMETER" (EU12 AVERAGE ON 7-POINT SCALE - TREND)
4 s 6 7 1 2 3 EUROPE'S PROGRESS
PERCENED CURRENT SPEED, DESIRED SPEED
21' 2 0
lseb OCI
I 1.1 1.6
i
0.8
4.4
r
1992 MAR
1993 MAY
1993 OCT
BJROBAROMETER 41 - FIGURE 216
.- ' .
,.I
.. . 1 -
a .
' I . I -
, .
- AWARENESS AND IMPORTANCE OF THE
EU PRESIDENCY OF OWN COUNTRY
AWARENESS IMPORTANCE” 2, -
.. c : . . . .
E J R O B A R O M m 41 - FEURE 217
. . . . . .I
_ - - ~ .: - - . _ -
on- EUROBAROME= 41
- .
According to thc "EURODYNAMOMETER', almost M o f EU citizens (48%) sœ Europe advancing relatively slowly af prrstnt: Paceivcd current pace of sdvaDc@ back to the modest 1986, 1987 level. A clcar majority (60%) would like to sec the spead of Eumpcan inugration incmse ( F i p 2.16, Table If). - The sentimm that things should go fasta is ment mall coumriCS except Denmark, where vims arc more dividai (41% ' m m quickly"; 35% "more slowly"). h k h g at the average ruult for both aspects, D- klieve the pcrccived spesd to k about right for t km
4.0). (3.8 ' a d w ~ r i n g n~wadays"; 4.0 %auld likt' aLI 8 Scaie from 1 to 7, tk mid-pOint kipg
hferences for w i n g the spccd of European imrgratian axe back to w h they wcre before the dip regised six months ago. 72s cecov~y has occumd everywhere, but to I slightly lesser extem in Germany than in otkr countries.
2.4 TheGmkPnsidency
S k Aurumn 1986. a question has bem asked in every EUROBARO- 8bout t& awareness and image of the Council Residency in thc holdmg the Presidency at tbc time of the s w e y . In Spnng 1994. 82% of Greeks say they have ' d y rud in tb newspapers or heard on the radio or television somedung about tk Gnck Residary' (Figure 2.17, Table 18).
*
Awareness levels for Grace arc very high, on a par with Luxembourg, Denmark hrtugal and thc Netherlands during the time of their Presidencies. It is 8 pints higbcr than duriq the t ime of their previous Residency in Autumn' 1988.
Apan from klg ium, there seems a tendency for the media in counlxics with brmllet populations to inducc bghcr awareness ievels of thcir Presidencia than in bigger COUOtljCd.
lnrsptctive of whether they have heard anyhng or not. Greeks were asked if- fœl if is imponant or not that Grrecc is Resident of the Council of Miaistcn of th Euqcm Union at this time. 80% sec it as very imponantlimponam, while 14% say it is not vay/a! all i m p o m . Only Ponugal has ever received a higher score dunng a prrtidency (85%).
. . .
I
i. .z -
. AWSrrrVE eFEcT Sl%
SINGE MARKET - HOPE OR FEAR3 EU12 - 1980 - 1994
I -1
I lat . .- . I.
.. .. - . 5-
e . .. . '. - 9 :.
- - 2 9 - EUROBAROMETER 41
Of those who have heard about the White Paper, people arc about two-tosne of the opinion that it will have a 'positive effect" (51 %) rather than "not a positive cffcct' (26%). Positivr opinions outnumber negative opinions everywhere except in the United K.mgdom (39% "positive"; 38% "nor positive") and Denmark (39%:35%). Most supportive (71%) are tk relarively few Iralians (14%;) who have heard of it (Table 20).
.
c
3.- EUROPEAN POLICY AREAS 3.1
The European Commission has been busy selling the ideas of ia White Paper on "Growth, Competitiveness and Employment"- Mr. W i g Rym, Commissioner for Social Affairs. has .been visiting the capitals of the European Union to encourage support for this ambitious plan to turn rhe ude of unemployment, mainly by a huge h"ent programme in the areas of rransponation, energy and telecommunications ("aans-European octworks).
Nevertheless, the Comksion's White Paper has clearly still not capwed the baghations of people at large, irrespective of thc domination of unemployment and the cconomic recession as issues throughout most of the European Union.
The White Paper: "Growth, Competitiveness, Employmmt"
Only 22% of people in Spring 1994 say they "have ever beard of the White Paper by the European Commission ¡n BNsels about growth, Competitiveness and employment in Europe". Awareness is highest in Denmark (39%). G m ~ c (35%). the Uniwd Kingdom (33%) and Ireland (31 %). Lowest awareness is mgistemi in Italy (14%), Belgiu"(16%) and the Netherlands (17 %) (Figure 3.1 , Table 19).
3.2 The Single ;llarket
Hopes and fears abour rhe Sinele Market have settled down over the past two ytan since the dramatic nse in fears ( - 9 ) in Spring 1992. 54% say they feel "very/rather hopeful' lbout the Single Market which came abour ar the beginning of 1993. 35% say they a "very/rather fearful' There has been no change over rhe past six months (Figure 3.2, Table 21).
The French continue to be divided on the ISSUC (47% "hope"; 48% "fear'). A large minorir). of Germans also express concern (41%) but half arc hopeful (50%). Absolute majontitl everywhere else are optimlstic.
- - - . - _ - . ' ._
..
m
IOI
I - t -- I m
I I I I I I 1 s s S. æ a 4l Y
Y 3 ID m m 0 P b 15
..
. . . ..
'NET APPROVAL- OF SINGLE EUROPEAN CURRENCY -DENMARK, GERMANY, UK, EU12
A l l m
- .
. . -. . . . .-. . *.;: .. .
. ti. ..,*. . * - .--
. :. . .
: - .. . . - .
. -.
-31- EUROBAROMETER 41
3.3 Political and mon- i n w o n
h t b t k~ypol i t i~al ancimonctary issues facing ~urape's agcada, Eu citizcns very supportive (Figure 3.3, Table 3): -
By 75% to 1596, that rhe EC/EUMember States should work towards a com" defurce policy;
By 68% to 17%. that European CommunityNnion Manba States should have one common foreign polis towards c o d e s outside the EC/EU;
By 65% to.221, thar there should be a Empean'MonetPrg UniOn d t h 8 European Central Bank-parsuhg a policy of monetary stability, thnt is, fighthg inflatio&
B y 5 3 9 6 t o 3 6 4 6 , ~ t t h e r r s h o ~ d b e a E u r o p e p n M o n ~ U n i o n ~ o n c ~ currency repladng by 1999 the (national -cy) md a?I osba nafiod currencies of the Member States of the European CommunftyNnion.
-
Ovn thc past four ytan, public support for a common defence and a common fm@ pom rose. now remaining at high levels. Popular backmg for thc European Cemal Bank hs baar increasing over thc samt period. Opposition to the single currc~cy may have baaomed out for now. As we begin t~ lead up to the 1996 Inur-Govermncntal ConferCIw - mb tk debate heats up on the above issucs - these indicators will become Critical in gaugbg pub* senrimenr about whm Europe's inuption should be rakulg us.
That is " l y majority suppon for the above four propo& in all with t& smgle m n c y proposal being the only exception in Denmark. the Unitcd Kingdom mf Gcnnany (Figum 3.4). Porruguese suppon for the smgle m n c y (-12). th Europan C d Bank (-11) and common defence (-12) has plunged sincc six months ago, rttbough a majority there still mnains in favour on all thrn issucs.
The establishment of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt does not secm to have much altrred feelings in Germany towards the single cumnry (+l), nor thc Europan ccmnl Bank itself (+4). Nevenheless most Gennans a.re convinced of the uscfubss of the Europuo Cemal Bank (60% 'for'; 29% 'agamst') even if they largely opposc th single
,
- nrmDcy (33%:55%).
3.4 Subddiprfty, national and EU policy domdncc
Should tbe European CowuunityRJnion be responsible only for mattcm tha! cam& k clfatitely handled by natiod, regiond and beal government? Tair-prkipk Oi 'subsidkrity' has the baclung of 57% of EU citizens. while cmly 22% appose (Table 3).
. . .
..
wnow OR JOINT EU DECISION
. - - ..
- .
-
..
,-
.. .. ,- .-e-
* .- r. ? . .a
.. v . *..-
‘ 5 8 -. .. .. .I-
. f, . . .. .. -. . . :..
._ .- , . . ~. . . . - - * -
. -
. . . . . - 3 3 - EUROBARO- 41
I =
has been change in view* six months ago &EU levCl. Darm are most - a u t this idca (70% 'for'; 19% 'against'), while a m a j e supp~n it in
cou~~pies. public for this prjs~ip~c went up +II m Luxembourg sincc last time.
Thc EURO BA RO^ has for some tb mcasurcd EU public prefa- for a numbu of key policy areas f~ be handlcd either at tht EU or national level ( F i p 3.5, Table 22). ThC d t s show that, broadly &, tk m to homc tbe issuC, tht "e pCoplc prcfa national g o v m e n s hadingit. Anythins to d0with"lsfW~ gets big supporr for EU action - while "bread aad butter" issutS SU& aS aS Well aS hcalth aod social w e l f a an perceived by the majority as Saictly witbh national g o v m e n t t ' runit. If OIE looks at variation over the past six m o d s llcfoss dl tbcse do", DD major change has ocamui at thc EU level - no more than3 points onauy issuc. At country level, thm arc a few v a y major movements: Dcnmark and bxanbourg shift (both +11) towards pcople wanting national govcmment to handle k protection of the mviromntnt. In Luxembourg more now f e l the European Union should hardle the health and safety of workas (+lo).
"defence" (50% EU: 45% national govcrrmtcnu) - as opposed to using the wofds 'semrity and defence' (48%:47%) makts a dif€crrncc of 4 points 'netg1. More respondents want tbc
keep this in thc exclusive competence of k i r national g o v m e n t (52% vs. 44%). Deding with unemployment (as it exists) in tenns of just amning unemployment benefits b e e properly paid - on the other hand - is sctll to be better d m at the national level by I (relative) majority of respondents (45% vs. 50%). A "nct" diffmnce of 13 points9. But the)r . look to the European Union as the best way actually to get them out of the mess. This is ID lmponant area rhat deserves funhcr in-depth analysis.
Two split ballots were conducted to see the impact of ~ o l l - w o r d i n g . using thc word
fight against Unempl0y"t to be mated at the Errropean community level than wup to'
I
. . . _ . ..
m - 'au
-4l-CDLIIELl ..
- .
SATlSFACTlON Wl lH UFE IN GENERAL.
. . ,f'
. . . , :, . .. i r.
. ..
-35-. . EUROBAROMETER41 .
4. OT€KER DIMENSIONS OF EUROPE
4.1 Satisfaction with life
Despiu economic recession in many parts of Europe, disaisfaaion with -, unemployment and othcr majoriv-ncgative views often exprrssed in public opinion pllr, eight out of ten EU atizclls (79%) are on the whole sa!Mkd with the Ilfe they lad. Only a fifth (20%) fœ1 dissatisfied (Figures 4.1 & 4.2, Table U).
There is a north-south split in tht Europtan Union on this maw. Tk proportions of those 'satisfied' are above-average in Denmark, &otIux camfries, tbc United Kingdom, k l a d and Germany. They k l o w average in Porcugal a d tk "ba couotritf bonking tbe M e d i u r " - including Fnacc.
In almost all counmes. at lean mwo-one f a l satisfial. Only in Grrecc is tk result more MITOW (55 k 'satisfied'; 45 % 'dissatisfied').
'
There has not k e n very much change in the m l t at the EU level since tbc gucstiOa was f i sr asked in Autumn I973 in the rhen m e Memkr States of thc European Community. In fact. the mult at rhe EU12 level now is exactly the same as it was at che Ec9 levd taremy y u r s ago (79%:20%). Satisfactioo with life has always rrmained at a high 74%-83% with dissatisfaction comrpondingly low (25%-16%).
. -
. - - . - . ..
. . . .. ' . .
' .- . ... ,
. . . . _ - . .. .. - . - . . .
LANGUAGES LEARNED AND ABLE TO CONVERSE (MCUIDING MOTHERTONGUE) - BY AGE- EU12
1m 2lU
- . B I - . -.-
œ6
. .-
. . . . . - . . - .. . . . . . .
- - . - - ,- . - .
.. . .
. .
-37- . EUROBAROMETER 41
k v e l of satisfanion with rie with thc level of arilllrrion md is significantly &@= among tbe young (15-24 year ol&) cspecblly if they axe still studyingio. It iS more m y found among white collar worken a d u n o q thosc who subjectively plae*thunsclves in the upper or upper middle clvr bradrct. Public anployecs axe much more often satisfied than thost working in nationalisai indusuis, with thosc in tht private scctor failing somewkc in the middle. h o n g bosc who arc uocmploycd, many more say they axe satisfied (62%) with iife than not (38%) (Table 24). d
It may be nosurprisc that English is the language inmost widespread w htht Europtan Union ("mother tongue speakers' + 'non-motber tongue speaken. but able to take parr in a conversation' = 42%). German (31%) comes 11~x1. followed clos~ly by (29%) (Tables 25-27).
Clearly German unification and the consequca enay of East Germany into the Europeur Union recently pushed the balancc mon in favour of the Gennan language. And Austrh's . recent 'JA' to the European Union in irr refe&! - with thc influx of another 7 million native German speak.cn - will automatically add around another 2% to the totat in tk Union able to speak the German language next y a .
English is the only language which can be used more by non-native (25%) than &ve (17%) speakers. Across the Union, 41 % non-native speaken have l d the English langurge, compared to 28% having leamcd French and 15% German (Table 28).
The English language is taught the most as a foreign language across Euro- UniOn '
countries except Luxembourg (where French (95%) equals Gennan (93%) in top pliW. tk Netherlands (English (85%) equal with German (81 %)) as well as Portugal (French (32%) equal with EngIish (29%)). French foreign language teaching predominates in &ve Englitb- s p k m g Ireland (41%) and the Umtal Kingdom (51%).
The development of educatron over the last decades is reflected in the m l t by age gmup (Figure 4.4, Tablu 29 and 30). For non-naove speakers aged 55+ y m , thcm was nof much difference betwcen the English and French language concerning tcachuJg (21% rrd 18% respectively having been taught) and c u m n t conversational ability (11 96 ancl 8%). Two out of five of 55+ year ol& repon havmg learned a language otha chan thcir own.
- . . . .
. I
. . * .
.- . -
. .
. . . .
, . -.- . . I_
. - .
.. , - . .
.;. : . -. ,- _.- . ..- .
. . ... . . ._ . . * '. . - ... i- . .. ,..* i . I " -27
.. -
l -
I
ANNEXES
. , .
' - A2 -
' STANDARD EUROBAROMETrR 41 .O - TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
CO-OPERATING AGENCJES AND RESEARCH EXECUTIVES
BELGIQUE MARKETING UNIT 430, A w n w Lorpr
z B-1050 BRUXELLES . DANMARK GFK DANMARK
TOldbOdQbd.. 108 DK-1253 COPENUAGEN K.
DEUTSCHLAND SAMPLE INS" PJp.ntamp. 2-6 0.23679 MbUN
ELLAS
ITALIA
E S P A ~ A
FRANCE
IRELAND
LUXEMBOURG
NEDERLAND
PORTUCU
GREAT BRITAIN
KEME lpoodamou Sunt. 24 CR-1 1635 ATUENA
PRAGMA V u Salana. 29B.
.WO199 ROMA
CIMEI Altœno AOuiklJ. 7-5. E-2801 5 MADRID
TMO Conrukamr 22. w du 1 Seofembre F.75002 PARIS
LANSDOWNE Marker Rerearch 1 2 . n a r a Srrnr IRL.DUELIN 2
ILRES 6. w bu M u c H NI Wetbr GD-1728 LUXEMBOURG
NIPO 'W*n.rdokhw' Buemuwon. 7 ML-1013 KI AMSTERDAM
NORMA ' '
P-1300 USBOA Av. kbma Smto 7Gl ul
Nop broarn. rd FiNnwl 1 & 2 B v r n S " London WIP 3AC UK
m. + + n 2 2 sa 80 i o Ma P u d r BERNARD ia. ++I3226483408
Mr €tik CHRISTUNSEN ol. + +I45 33 93 17 u) t u + + M S 33 13 07 40
Ma Dorir SIEBER tal. + +I49 4542 801 O t u . + +I49 4542 bol 201
MS Fotini PANOUTSOU trl. ++ IJ017018082 ++IJ0 1 701 78 37 t u
MS Marw-Adolaibr SA"nLU td. + +ns 6 884 80 57 tu ++l3S6IS4#)38
MC Cumon MOZO tol. ++I3426014793 + +I34 2 694 52 23 t u .
MS IsakIb CREBASSA tal. + + 1 3 3 1 4 4 0 1 4 0 ~ t u . ++i33 144S440001
Mr Rowr JUPP
Mr Chubs NARGUE n(. + +nr2 47 60 21 + +I362 46 ZO 20 iar.
Mr M m m JONKER m. + +ni zo 661 06 oi t u . ++a! 20 638 63 74
Mr Lopr DA SILVA n(. + +ns1 i wo1 os 12 t u . ++I361 1 m 1 6 l l
M r o r i r U Y (II. + +m 71 112 o i II t u + a 4 7 1 a i 2 0 2 2 2
. . .. . -
A3.- -
STANDARD EUROBAROMETER 41.0 - TECHNICAL SPECJFJCATIONS
l i
Povamm oea.rr( 101 gr 00% 20% a 80% 30% a 70% 10% a WU Ioy
c m n ~ 6 . c o n t w * 1.9% t 2.5% t 2.7% r 1.0% t a.is i
I .
P O R J U T I O I 1 5 + t ~ 7 m.4 4 180.4
13 007.0 ßl 7a.o 7 825.0
re u 7 2 U SlL8 2 u10
48 -8 X I L O
11 ml.0 7 718.7
44 662.0 llM.1
. . - A5
. _
ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONAL UNITS / UNITES ADMINISTRATNES REGIONALES
.. . . ._ . . . . . t
. .
. - . . . . . . . . __ . .
Figure
- El
E 2
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.1
I
. . . . . . ? - . . -
A6
LIST OF GRAPHICS / USTE DES GRAPHIQUES
Tiile / Titre
MEMBERSHIP GOOD THING OR BAD THING - 'EC' and 'EU(EC)' BY COUNTRY - SPRING 1994/ Appartenance une bonne chose ou une mauvaise chose . "CE" et 'UE(CE)' par pays . printemps 1994) . . . . . ...... Vi BENEFIT OF MEMBERSHIP - 'EC' and 'EU(EC)" BY COUNTRY - SPRING 1 994/ BBnbficiB ou non.dason appartenance B la.Communaut6 Europeenne 1 . "CE" et "UE(CE1" par pays- printemps 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
SATISFACTION WlTH DEMOCRACY IN THE EU / Satisfaction I'Bgard de Ia democratie dans I'UE .................................. 2
SATISFACTION WITH DEMOCRACY IN OWN COUNTRY / Satisfaction de Ia democratie dans son propre pays ......................... 2
AWARENESS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT IN THE MEDIA EU12 1977- 1994/ NotoriBtd du ParIBment EuropBen au travers des media U E l 2 1977- 1994 .............................................. 4
AWARENESS OF THE DATE OF THE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS OF 9/12 JUNE 1994 / Connaissance de la date des elections duropbennes de 9/12 juin 1994 ............................................. 4
NATIONAL OR EUROPEAN ISSUES INFLUENCE VOTE AT EUROPEAN ELECTIONS / Influence des questions nationales et europBennes sur Ie vote aux elections europdennes ............................... 6
MORE POWER OR NOT FOR THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT /Plus de pouvoir DU non pour le Parlement Europeen ......................... 6
.
SUPPORT AND PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP (EU121 1981- 1994 / Soutien et bdndfice de l'appartenance a I'UE (UEl2) 1981-1 994 8
2.2-1 5 SUPPORT AND PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP 1981-1994 (per . country) / Soutien et bdndfice de l'appartenance B I'UE 1981-1994 (par
pays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-24
. '
2.16 THE 'EURO-DYNAMOMETER' (EU12 AVERAGE ON 7-POINT. SCALE TREND) - EUROPE'S PROGRESS: PERCEIVED CURRENT SPEED, DESIRED . SPEED/ L"Euro-Dynamom4tre' (moyenne U E l 2 sur une Bchelle de 7 points - trend) -Ln progression de l'Europe: vitesse actuelle perçue, vitesse . souhaitde ......................................... 25
. t
. . .-
..I r'
- i -
, .
2.17
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
. I A7 - . .- I
AWARENESS AND IMPORTANCE OF THE EU PRESIDENCY OF OWN COUNTRY/ Notori6t6 et importance de Ia pr6sidence UE de .on propre pays ...........................:................. æ 26
AWARENESS OF THE WHITE PAPER 'GROWTH, COMPETITIVENESS, EMPLOYMENT -EU12 / Notoribt6 du Livnt Blanc 'Croissance, c o m p 6 M 6 ,
SINGLE MARKET: HOPE OR FËAR 'I EU12 - 1988-1994 1 March6 Unique - emploi' (UE12) ..................................... 28
espoir ou crainte UE12 0-1 990.1994 1 ..................... 28
SUPPORT FOR KEY ISSUES EU12 - 1990-1994 / Soutien B des *¿mes cl6s UE12 . 1990.1994 ........ : ..... .-. ................... 30 'NET APPROVAL' OF SINGLE EUROPEAN CURRENCY - DK, D, UK, EU12 / 'Approbation nette' de la Monnaie Unique Europbenne - DK, O, UK, U€ 12 .............................................. 30
NATIONAL OR JOINT EU DECISION MAKING? 18 POLICY AREAS - EUlW Lbgislations nationales ou UE? 18 domaines politiques . UElZ ..... 32 SATISFACTION WITH LIFE IN GENERAL - EU12 1973-1994 / Satisfaction
34
SAnSFACnON WITH LIFE IN GENERAL / Satisfaction avec Ia vie en gendral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
avec Ia vie en gdndral . UE12 1973-1 994 ...................
T
USAGE OF LANGUAGES IN THE EUROPEAN UNION - EU12 / Utilisation des langues dans I'UE . UE12 .............................. 36
LANGUAGES LEARNED AND ABLE TO CONVERSE (EXCLUDING MOTHERTONGUE) - BY AGE - EU12 / Langues apprises ou dans lesquelles ont peut converser, except6 langue maternelle - par catdgorie d'aga - - UE12 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
. .
. -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- . + - .. - . . . . . . . - -. . _ _ .
- .. . ._ . . .., -
. . . . y - .
- .
- . . .
A8
LIST OF TABLES / USTE DES TABLEAUX -
Tablenableau 1 : SATISFACTION WITH DEMOCRACY IN THE EU / Satisfaction i' I'dgard de ia democratie dans I'UE (46, by country/par pays) ........... A l 1
Tablenableau Satisfaction B . . . . . . . . . .
2 : SATISFACTION WITH DEMOCRACY IN O h COUNTRY 1 I'4gard de la d4mocratie dans son pays. f%, by country -r / par pays) ........................................... A l l
Tablenableau 3 : FOR OK AGAINST EU ISSUES / Pour OU contre les differentes questions UE (%, by country/par pays) ........................... A12
Tablenableau 3a : FOR OR AGAINST EU ISSUES / Pour ou contre les differentes questions U€ (%, EU 12 + /UE12 + , by socbdemographic and socio-political variabled par variables socio-demogrephiques e t socio-politiques) ...... A l 4
Tablenableau 4 : AWARENESS OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT I Notoriet6 du Parlement Europden (%, by country/par pays) .................... A l 6
Tablenableau 5 : KNOWLEDGE OF EURO-ELECTION DATE / Connaisance de Ir dato des dlections europdennes (%, by country/par pays) ................ A l 6
Tablenableau 6 : EUROPEAN OR NATIONAL ISSUES INFLUENCE VOTE 1 / Influence des thtimes nationaux ou europdms sur les intentions de vote (%, by c o u n w / par pays, only those who intend to vote / uniquement ceux qui ont l'intention de voter) ...................................................... A l 6
Tablenableau 6a : EUROPEAN OR NATIONAL ISSUES JNFLUENCE VOTE 7 / Influence des themes nationaux ou europ4ens sur les intentions de vote ? (%, .
EU 1 2 + /UE 12 + , by socio-demographic and socio-political variables/par variables socio-demographiques et socio-politiques) ....................... A l 7 .
Tablenableau 7 : MOST IMPORTANT WHEN VOTING ATEURO ELECTIONS /LO plus imponant lors du vote aux 4lections europdennes (%, by counuy/par pays, only those who intend to vote/untquement ceux qui ont l'intention de voter) . . A18
Table/Tableau 8 : THE ROLE DESIRED FOR THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT / Le rble souhait6 pour le Parlement European (%, by country/par pays) . . . . . . . . A18 .
Tablenableau 8a : THE ROLE DESIRED FOR THE EUROPEAN PARUAMENT /Le rbb souhait6 pour le Parlement europden I%, EU1 2 + NE12 + , by socio-demographic and socio-political vartables / par variables socio-d6mogrsphiques et socio-politiquer) . . ..................................................... A19
TabldTableau 9 : INTEREST IN EUROPEAN POLITICS / Int&& pour la politique europ6snne (%, by country/ par pays) ......................... AZO
.
. . \ . *
Table/Tableau 9a : INTEREST IN EUROPEAN POLITICS / lnt6rQt pour Ia po&que europeenne (%, EU1 2 + AJE1 2 + , by socio-demographic and socio-political variables/ .............. A21 par variables socio-d6mographiques et socio-pol~ques)
Tablerrableau 1 O : FEELING INFORMED ABOUT THE EUROPEAN UNION /Sentiment d'&tre inform6 sur l'Union Europienne (%, by country/par pays) ........ AZ2
Table/Tableau 1 1-1 3 : MEDIA USE / Recours aux medias (%, by cpuntry / par pays) i
Tablerrableau 14 : HAS OUR COUNTRY BENEFITED FROM EU MEMBERSHIP ? / Notre pays e-t-il ben6ficid de son appartenance I VUE ? (%8 by country/ par pays)
Table/Tableau 14s : HAS OUR COUNTRY BENEFITED FROM EU MEMBERSHIP ? / Notre pays a-t-il bdn6fici6 de son appartenance I I'UE 1 (%, by socio-demographic and socio-political variables/ par variables socio-ddmographiques et socio-politiques)
...........................,................*........ AZ2 -
..................................................... A23
..................................................... A24
Tablenableau 14b+c : HAS OUR COUNTRY BENEFfTED. FROM EC/EU(EC) MEMBERSHIP ? I Notre pays a-t-il Mn6fici6 de son appartenance & la CE/UE(CE) ? (96, by country/ par pays) ......................... A25
Tablemableau 1 5 : EU MEMBERSHIP: 'GOOD THING' ? / Appartenance I I'UE: .une .
bonne chose' ? (46, by countrylpar peys) . . . . : .................. "e
Tablemableau 15a : EU MEMBERSHIP : 'A GOOD THING' / L'appartenance VUE: "une bonne chose' ? (%, EU1 2 + N E 1 2 + , by socio-demographic and socio-political variabled par variables socio-demographiques et 'socio-politiques) ...... AZ7 Tablemableau 1 5b + c : EC/EUIEC) MEMBERSHIP: 'GOOD THING' ? /Appartenance A la CEA'UEICE): "une bonne chose' ? (%, by counhy/par pays) . ...... A28
'
TablWTableau 16 : FOR A EUROPEAN GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 7 I Pour un gouvernement europeen responsable devant le Parlement EuropCen 7 I % , by country/par pays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A28
Tablemableau 17 : 'EURO-DYNAMOMETER' /'Euro-Dynamom&tre' (%, bycountryl
TableiTabloau 18 : AWARENESS AND IMPORTANCE OF COUNCIL PRESIDENCY /- .
parpays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.................... . . "A29- .--
Notori6d et importance de la prdsidence du Conseil (%, 1986-1 994)
. -- .... A30
Table/Tableau 19 : WHITE PAPER AWARENESS / Notori6t6 Livre Blanc (%, by.. -.'ir - countty/ par pays) ....................................... A31 j . . . . . . a - .-. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .: -
. . . . . . . . . - . .
-. . .
* 1 , . I
A10 . -
Table/Tableau 20 : WHITE PAPER : POS& EFFECT ? / Livre Blanc : effet positif ? (%' only those who are aware of White Paper/ uniquement ceux qui ont entendu parler du Livre Blanc) .......................................... A31
Tableflableau 21 : THE SINGLE EUROPEAN MARKET : HOPE OR FEAR ? / Grand ....... A32 March6 Europeen : espoir ou crainte ? I%, by country/par pays)
Tableflableau 21 a : THE SINGLE EUROPEAN MARKET : HOPE OR FEAR ? / Le Grand March6 EuropØen : espoir ou crainte L'appanenance 9 I'UE : "une bonne chose" 7 (%' EU1 2 + /UE1 2 + , by socio-demographic and socio-political - vaflables/parvariables socio-ddmographiques et socio-politiques) ....................... A33
Tableflableau 22. : NATlONAL OR JOINT EUROPEAN UNION DECISION-MAKING ? / Ddcisions nationales ou en commun au sein de l'Union eutopdenne ? (%, by counny/ par pays) .............................................. A34
Tableflableau 23 : LIFE SATISFACTION / Satisfaction B 1'6gard de la vie qu'on m h o (%, by country/par paysl .................................. A30
Tablenableau 24 : LIFE SATlSFACflON i Satisfaction A I'dgard de la vie qu'on m h o (%, EU 1 2 + /Ml2 + by socio-demographic and socio-political variableslpat variables socio-ddmographiques et socio-politiques) ....................... A37
Tableflableau 25 : USAGE OF LANGUAGES IN THE EU / Utilisation des langues dans I'UE (%, by country/par pays) ............................... A38
Tablenableau 26 : LANGUAGE : MOTHERTONGUE / Langue maternelle (%, by country/ par pays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A38
Tablellableau 27 : FOREIGN LANGUAGES SPOKEN / Languesdtrangbres parides (%, by countrylpar pays) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A39
Tablenableau 28 : FOREIGN LANGUAGES LEARNED / Langues &rangbres apprises (%, by country/par paysl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A39
Tablenableau 29 : FOREIGN LANGUAGES SPOKEWLangues htranghrss parldes (%, by age/par categorie d'âgel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A40
Tablenableau 30 : FOREIGN LANGUAGES LEARNED/ Langues dtrangbres apprises (%, by agelpar catbgorie d'Ag@) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A m .
.. . .
- - .
.. .. .x - ; ..
.. .. - .. .. - - . . . - - - - : - .
* - - . . .. . L .'. .I..:.-
. . - . . - . - . ..
.. .. .- I . -: . . . . . .. . . - _ . -
' . . ' ~.
. .
I . l I -
. .
. . .
A13 .
,
. . . .
. . * . . . ,
A17 I' ,
i '
b
' .
I - l .
.. _. - . ..
.. , . - . .. .
. . . -..
A19
I
TOIAL
* * * 4 4
-. I I 1
21 ' 23
I I01 100 100 loo 100 100 100 loo loo loo loo loo loo . "loo loo loo 16 11 10 14 I @ 28 21 II 18 11 28 2D 23 I b
I --
' .i,'
18 18 19 24 a1 21 26 1 21 I3 26 20 28 IJ 101 101 1W 101 ra, 'loo I W . 100 w loo 101 loo 101 loo 101 18 lol loo TOTAL
\
CI &8-r+-. I
' I rq * m b a d d - h - m
5 * . I.
I
. .
. I
.
..
. ".' 1 .
. .-. -. '.
e .- ..-
. . .'e - . * .*. . .
. e . . -. ' . . ..
. . A 2 1 t ,
0 . . * . I
. .
,,. ,
. .. . . . . I
. - ' . . . .
.~ - . . . . . ., .
,.. . . 1 _ - _ - . . -
A22 :
. .
. - . . .
. . I ._
. .
- C..
..
.. A23 -. - .
. - - . . .
O
im 101
-.s . .c.- .. ..... - . .
,- e., . . . :- :_
a . . . . . .
. . .
. . I * I _
. - ._ . *'.
A24
. .
. .
a
1 ASC A l EMO Of SIUOISI ASE OE flw D'LIUOES
LEVEL OF WCWEf NIVLAU OE REVENU I")
ACt tMPlOIMfM1 SECIOR
u f 1514 15 39 4054 551 prbk nat. )tiralo * * * + " - .II 1 8 l b 20. @I1 €UI?* @* I~rrüo il&lll Iv I t C l U
I E W E F l l l O 49 44 51 51 46 39 52 35 44 56 4B 43 43 39 45 69 sa 41
MOI DfNEflIEO 36 33 2 ) 30 38 40 33 43 38 31 3 8 3 9 3 6 40 . S . 21 24 34 II Ib 21 21 tg 14 1B ln Mms?
IOIM too loo loo loo loo too 100 too 101 too 101 I01 1w 101 loo loo 101 100
- I 5 21 2 1 19 16 I I 15 I 2 I8 I3
I I I I I I I
I-.. . . . I .r:
- .. . . 0
- . . .
_. . -..
I .
A27
+ * * *.
- ,
. I
( . @ I .
I .
I
L
. . . , . . , .
. -
I
. . . . . . . - -
A28
.
. .
. . @
.. , . ._
.. - .. . . . I
. , :.:
1
ID U
. . . . . . - -. .
. . . . =
-. . . . --;. -
. A30 - -
.. c
: .*? % -
'I - ,* . . .* , . .
.. . .
. .
. .
. .
-:
. . . . . . . . .
. . . .- .
- . 1 7 . . .
. . . . - - . . . . .. . .
.: . .
..
. - - _ . . . . - . . . . - . . . . . i ; - . ,
. . - , - - . . . . . . . . . .
- . . . -.. . . .
A32 .
I .
. .
. ..
L . . .. .
A33
I - rotu I
A34
. ... . - . . -
i~ o ~ M I i im P baal
Il"-'"
- -.
. A35
- -
. . . -. . . ..,. . .
* .._- . . . . .
-. . f ..
Ne ru( po 1 o 1 4 1 1 o o o 1 o o o l e l 1 o I TOTU 100 101 101 101 1w im 101 100
I - l .
I . . .
. 1.
1 W r y U 24 :
A37
I I y I 15" I5l9
I I
4
I
- - -+
I
IOIAl i o 1 i01 ioz ia 3.0 3 0 3.1 3.m
I I I .- - 4 2 I 4 J 1 4
1 O 1 1 1 1 )B la, 101 101 101 loo rda 101 . 100
J I 8 3 . 8 8
I I O O 0 . 1 1 'I 101 im IO1
. ; ' . ' . ,.. ..
. . I .. .'r.!.. . I . ; .; . , , . # : * ; . : I \
! . . . . : .'. I , ,
. . . . . . . . . . . : .. ,. . I
. . . . , . ; ; B . I .
:, .... ; .-.. .,.:-:**:. > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *-..-, :--. . -.-.- . . . . . . . . . .
...... 7
. . . . . . . . . . . .- - - - ..-. - . . - .
. .
... . * - .
. . . . . . -. . -.. - - - . . .- - . _. . - - . . .
- . . . - -
P
1
20
im o i
O 0
. . - - I -
u BIU.
O 0 2 1 8 3 l
a n m 2 18
O l 7 IQ) 4
7 a u o a
a 1 8 7
o
A38.
IW
34 3
U I L I
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 0 1 0
O ” o o o o s l m o o 1
0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0
1 o o s ( s
O 0 0 0
1w 101 1m
?
0 0 2 0 0 2 4 D O U
O O
0 0 0 O a 0 0 8 ta o o o a o a a O O .
loo a
u m
17
17
a
lm
. -.. . .
. - . . .
. . . .
- . - . . . .- I A39 . - .
œ
u
O O
2l 2 1
4
-
a O
1
a m
4 -
I
II
O
W 18
1
8 71
3 1
1
4
13
I
a I
I
?
O 1
a 1
O
I
m 7 O
O 1
I
O I
I
E
O
1
B 1
O 13
13
2 O
11
60
1
I
I
- C
O
7 5
3 O 1)
10
1
O
3
s
1
-
-
- U
O 4
U
1
O 8 1
O
O
11
8
12
-
-
I
I
O I
a 17
O
O
18
2 O
O
1
I
1 I
I
I
2 I
a 'I
U 4
48
4
3 2
O
2
18 I
611
O
5
4
2 O 2s O
O
O
3 I
O
I
I
= z i i ï _t
I @ 1 1 - 1 I 1'-
3 1 3 1 1 I I
-11 I B I 2 I I
1 1 1 1 0 I I 1 l l l O I I 4 0 1 1 5 1 1 8 I I
2 1 1 1 1
o ! o ' o
10 ; P :'al
0 ~ 0 ; o i I I I I 1 1
I I
DI
1
47
E 1
1
m 2 O
O
5
11
5
I
I
I I
24 1 21 f t
- I
O
7
1 O
O
42
4
-
a 1 1
n
O -
E
CR
O
7
10
4
o 1 I
o o 3 52
O
-
I
I
E
O
3
18
2
o
-
m 13
2
1
13
I7
1 I
- F
O
U 5
6
1
59
21 I
1 8
-
m
1 -
I
1111
O
10
41
1
O
B 4
O
1
m Q
I
-
I
I
1
3 - aj
@5
17
8
Q 7
6
2 O
1
8 I
I
II
1
81
9 4
8 15 8 2
-
a lo 8
2 I
I
?
O
2 a 2 O
-
m 8 O
O 1
H
m I
- u 1
n n 8 2 4
O
1
2 8 s
1
-
-
- Etu
1
1s
2)
-
a 2
41
O 1
1 8 s
4 - .. . .
1 1 1 1 1
I I 2 3 1 1 9 1 6
I l 2 I 2 1 . 1
I I 1 1 1 1 0
I I !nlY136 I I
3 1 2 1 1 I I
0 1 0 1 0 I I
1 1 1 1 0 I I I l u l u I I
3 ! 3 1 1 I
a : a ! l D
J l i ' 12 I 12 I 12
- . . . . . ..
‘ ”
I -
1524
0 ; 10
IO 2 1
41..
8 O
-0 5 I 8
O
7 .U 2
- 1
21 4
1
O
4
s 8
ss* o 8 8 1
1
11
4
O
O
3 ßb
11
5* ’
1
10
18
2 1 . . n a ‘ D 1 8 ‘ bl O -.
. I
. . . . . . a .
- - . . . 1” . .
.. . . ..
. . .
.. .. . - .- . . _ - . - ., , . .
. . . - - ' - 7 . . . . __. . .- . .- . - - . . _
- . a - .
. ,. . : .. ;. .
. - . . - _ . .
. . . - . .
- --
. ' A41 -
RECHERCHES SUR LES Anr rUDES DES EUROPEENS I . - .. SURVEYS ON A l l l l l JDES OF EUROPEANS -
c - - _'LES E U R O P m S ET L'UNIFTCATION DE t'EUROPE' / 'EUROPEANS AND EUROPEAN UNIFICATION' {FREN) Sondage de f6vrier-mars 1 970 / Survey carried out in February-March 1970 Rapport juin 1972 / Report June a 1972 - 240 p. r' .
'L'OPINION DES EUROPEENS SUR LES ASPECTS REGIONAUX ET AGRfCOLES DU MARCHE COMMUN. L'UNIFICATION POLITIQUE DE L'EUROPE ET L'INFORMATION. DU PUBLIC' (FRI Sondage de juillet 1971 / Survey camed out in July 1971. Rapport dkembre 1971 / Report December 1971 - 64 p.
'SATISFACTION ET INSATISFACTION QUANT AUX CONDITIONS DE VIE DANS LES PAYS DE LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENNE' (FR) Sondage de septembre 1973 I Survey carried out in September 1973. Rapport juin'1974 I Repon June 1974 - 120 p.
'L'EUROPE VUE PAR LES EUROPEENS' (FR) Sondage de septembre 1973 / Survey carried out in September 1973. Rapport ao& 1974 / Report August 1974 - 48 p.
'EUROBAROMElRE' I "EUROBAROMETER" (Disponible dans toutes .ler langues communautaires / Available in all Community languages). Sondage semestriel dont les rdsultats sont publi6s depuis juin 1974. / Half- yearly survey published as from June 1974.
'FEMMES ET HOMMES 0'EUROPE"I "EUROPEAN MEN AND WOMEN' . 1 FR/EN/DE) Sondage de mai 1975 / Survey carried out in May 1975 Rapport dkembre 1975 / Report December 1975 - 21 5 p.
'LE CONSOMMATEUR EUROPEE"/ "EUROPEAN CONSUMER' (FWEN) Sondage d'octobre 1975 / Survey carried out in October 1975 Rapport mai 1976 / Report May 1976 - 175 p.
'LA PERCEPTION DE LA MISERE EN EUROPE' / 'THE PERCEPTION OF ' - POVERTY IN EUROPE' (FR/EN/DE/NUDA) Sondage de mai-juin 1976 / Survey carried out in May-June 1976. Rapport mars 1977 /Report March 1977 - 144 p. - 2 O 6dition (FR) septembre 1981.
. .. . - - . . - -- .. -LA SCIENCE ET L'OPINION PUBUQUE EUROPEENNE; I -SCIENCE AND -: EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION' (ENIDEIITINL) (FR 6puis6) . .. . * Sondage d'avril-mai 1977 / Survey camed out in AprikMay 1977. Rapport octobre 1977 / Report October 1977 - 98 p.
- ox -. .
--c
- _ - . . . . . .
I -
l .
- A42 .
'LES A7l"UDES DE LA POPULATION ACTIVE A CEGARD D E S PERSPECTlVES DE LA REfRAITE' / 'THE ATTlTUDES OF THE WORKINß'
Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1977 / Survey carried out in October- November 1977. Rapport mai 1978 / Report May 1978 - 52 p.
'LES ATTITUDES DU PUBLIC EUROPEEN FACE AU DEVELOPPEMENT SCIENTIFIQUE ET TECHNIQUE' / 'THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC'S ATTITUDES
Sondage d'octobre 1978 / Survey carried out in October 1978. Rapport fevrier 1979 / Report February 1979 - 67 p.
POPULATION TO RFnREMENT (FWENIDEITT-4 ..
TO SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT' (FR/DE) (EN Bpuise)
"FEMMES ET HOMMES D'EUROPE EN 1978' / 'EUROPEAN MEN AND WOMEN IN 1378' (FWEN/DE/IT/NU Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1977 / Survey carried out in October- November 1977. Rapport fevrier 1979 / Report February 1979 - 248 p.
'CHOMAGE ET RECHERCHE D'UN EMPLOI: attjtudes et opinions de8 publics europØens' (FR) Sondage de mai-juin 1978 /.Survey carried out in May-June 1978. Rapport septembre 1979 / Report September 1979 - 74 p.
'LES EUROPEENS ETLEURS ENFANTS- / 'THE EUROPEANS AND THEJR CHILDREN' (FR/EN/DE/NUDA/IT) Sondage d'avril 1979 / Survey carried out in April 1979. Rappon octobre 1979 / Report October 1979 - 102 p.
'LES FEMMES SALARIEES EN EUROPE: comment elles perçoivent la8 discriminations dans le travail' / 'EUROPEAN WOMEN IN PAID :. EMPLOYMENT: their perception of discrimination at work' (FR/EN/DE/NUIT/DA/GR)
Rappon ddcembre 1980 / Repon December 1980 - 72 p.
.- Sondage de juin-juillet 1980 / Survey carried out in June-July 1980. . -.
'LES EUROPEENS ET LEUR REGION: &ude exploratoire sur Ia perception . .
der disparith rociodconomiquer' / EUROPEANS AND THEIR REGION: ' .*
public perception of the socio-economic disparities: an exploratory study' - Sondage d'avril-mai 1980 / Survey carried out in April-May 1980.
I . . (FR/EN/DE/NUIT/D A) . .
Rapport ddcembre 1980 / Repon December 1980 - 62 p. .. i-.. - . . . . . . . . - . . - . *- . .. 'L'OPINION EUROPEENNE E l LES QUESflONS ENERGETIQUES' I
EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM' (FWEN) Sondage de mars-avfil 1982 / Survey camed out in March-April 1982 Rappon octobre 1982 / Report October 1982 - 79 p.
.__. .'"' .. _,' ': ., .. .-?:
-. . .. . +..> .. .< --:
. . . -. . :' ..- '. -. .. -
. - . .. . . . ..c.
. ... Y;
. :- . ._ .- .. . . . . - . .
. . .. .. . . -. ,. . - . ' * _ .
(1 8) "LES JEUNES EUROPEENS : &do e x p l o h d m m s (Lq6s de 1s' i 24 ana dans'bs pays de b Communauti Eump6am' / T H E YOUNG EUROPEANS: Exploratory -dy on young p o p k ag& botwmn 95 and 24 years in tho countries of tho European Community' (FRIEN/DE/NUKIDNGR) Sondage de mars-avd 1982'1 Survey camed out in March-April 1982. Rapport ddcembre 1982 / Report December 1982 - 139 p.
'LE PARLEMENT EUROPEEN & L'ELECllON DE 1984' &RI Sondage de mars-avd. 1983-1 Survey comed.out im March-April 1 983. Rapport ao& 1983 / Report August 1983 - 105 p.
'LES EUROPEENS ET LEUR ENVIRONNEMENT' 1 'EUROPEANS AND THUR ENVIRONMENT (FRIENMLAT/DA/DE) . Sondage d'octobre 1982 / Survey camed out in October 1982. Rapport novembre 1983 / Report November 1983 - 64 p.
(19)
(20)
(2 1 ) 'LES EUROPEENS ET L'AIDE AU DEVELOPPEMEW / 'EUROPEANS AND AID TO DEVELOPMENT' (FWEN) Sondage de septembre-octobre 1983 I Survey carried out in September- October 1983. Rapport mai 1 984 / Report May 1984 - 134 p.
(22) 'FEMMES ET HOMMES D'EUROPE EN 1983' / "EUROPEAN WOMEN AND MEN IN 1983' (FREN + r&sumds disponibles dans les autres langues communautaires/ FR/EN + summaries available in other languages of the Community). Sondage de mars-avril 1983 / Survey csmed out in March-April 1983. Rapport juin 1984 / Report June 1984 - 186 p.
(23) 'LES FEMMES SAlARlEES EN EUROPE - 1984' / "EUROPEAN WOMEN IN PAID EMPLOYMENT' (EN) Sondage de janvier-fdvrier 1984 / Survey carried out in January-February 1984. Rapport ddcembre 1984 / Report December 1984 - 1 18 p.
(24) 'LE PUBLIC EUROPEEN ET L'INFORMATION DES CONSOMMATEURS : COMPARAISONS 1975-1985' (FR) Mars 1985 / Merch 1985 - 18 p. Rapport mars 1985 / Report March 1985
'L'OPINION EUROPEENNE ET LES QUESTlONS ENERGETIQUES EN 1984'/ 'THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM IN 1984' . .._ (FRENDE) Sondage d'octobre 1984 / Survey csmed out in October 1984. Rapport juillet 1985 / Repon July 1985 - 99 p.
T
(25)
- h *
. - .. . .. . .
' .
. . . F
' .. : -
. ,.
_ _ - . . . - --.
- A44
'L'OPINION DES SALARIES EUROPEENS SUR LA -BI= DANS LES CONDmONS DE TRAVAIL' (FR) Sondage de mam-bVrJ 1985 / Survey camed out in March-April 1985. Rapport juillet 1985 / Report Jub 1985 - 47 p.
'ENQUETE AUPRES DES TRAVAIILEURS S M E S SUR LA FLEXIBIUTE DANS LES CONDIWONS DE TRAVAIL' / 'EMPLOYEE SURVEY ON
(Economie europØenne / European Economy nr. 27) Rapport octobre 1985 / Report. October 1985 -- 12 p .
'LE PUBLIC EUROPEEN ET L'ECU' / 'EUROPEANS AND ECU' (FWEN/DE/NL) Enquete faite dans sept pays do Ia Communaut6 Europ6enne B l'initiative d'un groupe de banques. / Survey c h e d out in seven EC countries on behalf of a group of banks. Sondage de mars-avril 1985 / Survey camed out in March-April 1985. Rapport novembre 1985 / Report November 1985 - 43 p.
-.
LABOUR MARKET R D ( I B I W FR) i
z
'LES EUROPEENS ET LES VACANCES' / 'EUROPEANS AND THEIR HOLIDAYS' (FR/EN/DE/IT/DA/ES/GR) Sondage de mars-avril 1986 / Survey camed out in March-Aptif 1986. '
Rapport mars 1987 / Report March 1987 - 104 p.
"EUROPE 2000' (Disponible dans toutes les langues communautaires I Available in all Community languages). Sondage de dbc. 1986-janv. 1987 / Survey camed out in Dec. 1986Jan. 1987 Edition spØciale de I'Eurobaromdtre pour Ie 30dme anniversaire du Trait6 de Rome, mars 1987 I Special Edition of the Eurobarometer for the 30th Anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, March 1987 - 58 p. -
&
"LES EUROPEENS ET LEUR ENVIRONNEMENT EN 1986' / 'EUROPEANS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT IN 1986' (Disponible dans toutes les langues * communautaires / Available in all Community languages). Sondage de mars-avril 1986 / Survey camed out in March-April 1986 Rapport mars 1987 I Report March 1987 - 107 p.
'LES EUROPEENS ET LA SECURITE ROUflERE' / "EUROPEANS AND ROAD SAFETY' (FR/EN) Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1986 / Survey camed out in October- . : ,. . -* November 1986. -.. Rapport mars 1988 / ReportMarch 1988 - 98 p.
, - -
. .*
*.. .e - . i.
. 1 - . - c . . . i r .
' * . . :..:.?; .- - . . . .. :-..
..: ,:. . ' . - -. ._ . -. . .. , . . .
... . . , . . . . .
_ - . . .. . ...
, .-
; I - ' i
A45 c
'L'OPINION EUROPEENNE ET LES QUBTIONS ENERGETIQUES EN 1986' / 'EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM IN 1986' (ENPR + rbsum¿s disponibles en DE/ES/NUDA/PO / FWEN + rummsrigs available in D€/€S/NUDA/PO/IT) Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1986 / Survey carried out in October- November Y 986. Rapport janvier 1988 / Report January 1988 - 163 p.
'LES EUROPEENS ET LA PREkNTION DU CANCER : u k 6tude sur kr attimder et compo"ents du public.' /.'EUROPWS AND CANCER PREVENTION : a study of atitudes and behaviour of the public' (FWEN)
- Sondage de mars-avril 1987 / Survey carried out in March-April 1987. Rapport juin 1988 / Report June 1988 - 88 p.
'LES EUROPEENS, LEUR AGRICULTURE ET IA POLITIQUE AGNCOLE COMMUNE' / 'EUROPEANS, AGRICULTURE AND THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY'. (Disponible dans toutes Ies langues communautaires / Availaible in all Community languages). Sondage de mars-avril 1987 / Survey carried out in March-April 1987. Edition speciale de I'Eurobsromdtre - Fdvrier 7 988 / Special edition of the Eurobarometer -February 1988 - 60 p.
'HOMMES ET FEMMES D'EUROPE 1987. Evolution der opinions et dos attitudes.' / "MEN AND WOMEN IN EUROPE 1987. The evolution of , opinions and attitudes.' (FR/EN) . Sondage de mars-avril 1987 / Survey carried out in March-April 1987. Supplement n026 de 'Femmes d'Europe' / Supplement nr. 26 of 'Women of Europe'. - 64 p.
"L'OPINION EUROPEENNE ET LES QUESTIONS ENERGETIQUES EN 1987' I 'EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM IN 1987'. (FRIEN) Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1987 / Survey carried out in October- November 1987. Rappon mai 1988 / Repon May 1988 - 174 p.
. .
'LES EUROPEENS ET L'AIDE AU DEVELOPPEMENT EN 1987' , / . .
'EUROPEANS AND DEVELOPMENT AID IN 1987'. (FREN) Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1987 / Survey carried out in October- 2 *. November 1987. Rapport mars 1988 / Report March 1988 - 70 p.
'LES JEUNES EUROPEENS E N 1987' I 'THE YOUNG EUROPEANS IN '.'i 1987'. (FRIENI - . , .:.: Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1987 / Survey carried out in OCtab&-'-~ November 1987. Rapport mars 1989 / Report March 1989 - 208 p.
-. - . ..a .
. . . - . * :..- . .. ..
. _ .- , 1 . -a:
- .C.. C. . ._-. .. -- ._ -. : .f' .* . -
. . . .:
. . -.
.. . . - . : . . . -
* - . . .. .
T . .. :. ,
. . . .. . _ .. . . . . ..-
c
(39) 'LES EUROPEENS ET LEUR ENVlRONNEMEM EN 1988' / 'EUROPEANS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT IN 1988.' (FR) Sondage de mars-avd 1988 / survey carried out in March-Apd 1988. Rapport octobre 1988 / Report October 1988 - 71 p. .
(40) .
'LES EUROPEENS ET LA PREVENTION DU CANCER : consommation alimnmim, tabagisme, dbpbmge der cancers fb@nms'. / 'EUROPEANS AND THE PREVENTION OF C Y C E R : food consumption, mokmg, screening for women'r canwrs'. (FREN)
Rapport dkembre 1988 / Report December 1988 - 71 p.
'RACISME ET XENOPHOBIE. Dr& do l'homme et immigmtion dans b Communautb europbenne' / 'RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA. Human rights and immigration in the European Community' (Disponible dans toutes les langues communautaires I Available in all Community languages) Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1988 / Survey camed out in October- November 1988. Rapport novembre 1 989 / Report November 1989 - 120 p.
r
. . -Sondage de mars-avril Y 988 / Survey camed out in March-April 1988.
(41)
(42) 'LES EUROPEENS ET IA PREVENTlON DU CANCER : Ia notori6t6 du Programme et du Code europben' / 'EUROPEANS AND THE PREVENTION OF CANCER : awareness of th Prograrrune and the European Codo' (FREN). Sondage d'octobre-novembre 1988 / Survey carried out in October- November 1988. Rapport juin 1989 / Report June 1989 - 85 p.
'LES EUROPEENS, LA SCIENCE ET LA TECHNOLOGIE / 'EUROPEANS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY' Sondage mars-avril 1989 I Survey carried out in March-April 1989. Rapport non disponible / Report not available. Article disponible en EN / Article available in EN ("Europeans, Science and Technology' by J.R. Durant, J.D. Miller, J.F. Tchemia, W. van Doelen. A paper presented to the 1991 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, OC. 15 February 1991, 22 p.).
a
(43)
(44) 'LES EUROPEENS ET IA PREVENTION DU CANCER : comportements R h au rirquo de cancer- / 'EUROPEANS AND CANCER PREVENTlON : bohaviour linked with cancer' (FRI Sondage mars-avril 1989 / Survey carried out in March-April 1989
-
Rapport d6cembre 1989 / Report December 1989 - 79 p. . L
e . - - (45) 'LES EUROPEENS E l LA PAUVRETE' / 'EUROPEANS AND POvuCrr . * * .. . . .& . . (FRENI Sondage juin-juillet 1989 / Survey carried out in June-July 1989 - . . Rapport mars 1990 / Report March 1990 - 11 O p. -.. ..
. * . - .
(46)
(47)
(48)
(49)
151)
(52)
(52A)
-- . .. _ . . - . . - 7 - . - . .- . a . - . ._. . . . - . . -
- A 4 7 ' . . . . -
'LES EUROPEENS ET LES QUEsnONS ENERGfnaUES EN 1989'' I 'EUROPEANS AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM IN 1989' (FRENIDE)
Rapport novembro 1989 / Report November 1989 - 11 1 p. Sondage juin-juillet 1989 / Survey camed out m 3une-Juiy 1989
4
'LES EUROPEENS ET LES ELECTIONS EUROPEENNES 1989' / 'EUROPEANS AND THE 1989 EUROPEAN ELECTIONS' Sondages oct.-nov. 1988, mk-av t i l 1989 et juin-juillet 1989/Surveys .- camed out in ~ ~ - N O V . 1988, in March-April 1989 and in-June-July 1989 Diverses publications. 1 989 ff .. du Groupe Transnational d'Etudes sur ies Elections Europ&mnes/Various publications 1989 ff. of the Transnational European Election Study GrouplCoordination: Hermann SCHMITT, Zentrum für Europäische Umfrageanalysen und Studien (ZEUS), Universität Mannheim, Fed. Rep. of Germany.
-
"LA FAMIUE ET LE OESIR D'ENFANTS' / 'THE FAMILY AND THE DESIRE FOR CHILDREN' (ENIDE) (FR dpuisd) Sondage octobre-novembre 1 989 /Survey carried out in October-November 1989 Rapport août 1990 / Report August 1990 - 1 19 p.
'L'OPINION PUBLIQUE DANS IA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEE"€ A PROPOS DES NATIONSUNIES' / "PUBLIC OPINION IN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ABOUT THE UNIED NATIONS' (EN) Sondage octobre-novembre 1 989/Survey camed out in October-November . 1989 Publiti au printemps 1990 par l'ONU / Published in Spring 1990 by the UN .
"LES JEUNES EUROPEENS EN 1990' / 'THE YOUNG EUROPEANS IN 1990' (FRENISondage octobre-novembre 1990 / Survey carried out in October-November 1990 Rappon mai 1991 / Repon May 7997 - I97 p.
'FAMILLE ET EMPLOI DANS L'EUROPE DES DOUZE" / "FAMILY AND EMPLOYMENT WITHIN THE TWELVE' (FREN) Sondage octobre-novembre 1 990lSurvey caried out in October-November 1990 Rapport dtcembre 199 1 /Report December 7 991 - 174 p.
'FIRST EUROPEAN SURVEY ON THE WORK ENVIRONMENT 1991-1992' (EN) Sondage mars-avril 1991/Survey camed out in March-April 1991 -. Published in 1992 by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions - 229 p.
.-
- . . . - . . -. ...
* .
c - . .
- - - \
.L
- - , - . - : - - 1 - . . -_ - . - - . - . __- 1% I - -:. *--- . - * - - -
- r * - _ . . - _ _ - . - - . - A40
. .-
. - (53). 'LA REPRESEtUATlON DES INTERETS DANS QUATRE PAYS DE LA CE' / 'INTUIEST REPRESENTATION IN FOUR EC COUNTRIES'
1990 Publi6 en 1991 par Ie Wissenschahsrentrum Beriin für Sozialwissenschafrenb~~hed in 1991 by the Wissenschaftsrent" Berlin für Sozialwissenschaftm (WZB)
Sondage octobre-novembre 1990 / Survey camed out October-November -r
(55) 'ESOMAR HARMONISED DEMOGRAPHICS FOR EUROPEAN SURVEY RESEARCH' (ENI Survey camed out October-November 1990.Published 1991 by the European Society for Opinion and Market Research (ESOMAR).
l -
(56) 'LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENNE ET L'AllEMAGNE UNIE EN AUTOMNE 1990' l'THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND UNED GERMANY IN AUTUMN 1990' (DE) . Rapport special sur les resultats du sondage Eurobarometre No.34, octobre . 1990 / Special report on the results of the October 1990 Eurobarometer survey No. 34. Rapport en fevrier 1991 / Repert February 1991 '- 41 p.
(57) 'L'OPINION EUROPEENNE ET LES QUESTIONS ENERGETIQUES EN 1991' / 'THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION AND THE ENERGY PROBLEM IN 1991 ' (FR/EN) Sondage mars 1991 / Survey camed out in March 1991. Rapport novembre 1991 / Repon November 1991 - 85 p. . .
(58) 'LES EUROPEENS ET LA SANTE ET IA SECURllE AU TRAVAIL" I 'EUROPEANS AND HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK' (ENFR). Sondage avril-mai 1991 / Survey carried out in April-May 1991 Rapport publie en 1992 / Report published in 1992 - 140 p.
'CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR IN THE INTERNAL MARKET (EN) Survey carried out in April 1991 Report July 1991 - 16 p.
(59)
(60) 'EUROPEAN ATTITUDES TOWARDS URBAN TRAFflC PROBLEMS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT' IEN) .4
Rapport juillet 1991 / Report July 1991 - 72 p. Sondage avril 1 991 / Survey carried out in April 1991 ,.
(61) 'L'OPINION DES EUROPEENS CONCERNANT LA BJOTECHNOLOGIE EN - . .- 1991' / 'OPINIONS OF EUROPEANS ON BIOTECHNOLOGY IN 1991' (ENPR)
. - . . . .. , :.
-' .: :'!-
- Sondage mars-avril 1991 / Survey camed out in March-April 1991 Rapport juillet 1991 / Report July 1991 - 76 p.-
Federation of Biotechnology. London 1992.
0 .
. I
A book on this topic is also available: Durant, John ed., 'Biotechnology in * ; Public: A review of recent research.. Science Museum for the European
. .-
... . . . .: . . ._
. . - . ' .. . . .
. . . . -
.. . . . . . . . .
(63)
64)
(65)
(66)
'LA COMMUNAUTE EUR0PEE"E ET l'ALLEMAGNE UNIE AU PRINTEMPS 1991' / 'THE EUROPEAN COMMUNrrV AND UNITED GERMANY IN SPRING 1991 ' (DEPWEN) Rapport sp6oial sur les rØsultats du sondage Eurobaromdtre No 35, mak 1991 / Special report on the results of the March 1991 Eurobaromter survey No 35 Rapport avril 1991 / Report April 1991 - 17 p.
1
-LES POLITIQUES REGIONALES DANS L'OPINION PU~IQUE- 'RCt?lnNAI POI ICY IN THE PUBLIC OPINION'
Survey carried out in October-November 1 99 1' Etudes de DØveloppement Rdgional, N03, CCE Bruxelles 1992
'LA FACON DONT LES EUROPEENS PERCONENT LE TIERS-MONDE EN 91' I 'THE WAY EUROPEANS PERCElVE THE THIRD WORLD IN 1991' IFWEN) Sondage octobre-novembre 1 991 / Survey carried out October-November 1991 Rapport paru en mai 1993 / Report May 1993
'LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENE E l L'ALLEMAGNE UNIE EN AUTOMNE . 1991' I 'THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND UNITED GERMANY IN A U N M N 1991' (DEIFWENI . Rspport sp6cial sur les rtsultats du sondage Eurobsrom&tre N036, octobre- novembre 1991 / Special report on the resutts of the October-November 1991 Eurobarometer survey No 36. Rappon ddcembre 1991 / Report December 1991 - 20 p.
.
'LES EUROPEENS Ei L'ENVIRONNEMENT EN 1992"/ 'THE EUROPEANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN 1992' (FR/EN) Sondage mars-avril 1992 / Survey carried out in March-April 1992 Rapport novembre 1992 / Report November 1992 - 11 8p. (Brochures disponibles en FR/EN / Brochures available in FR/EN)
'SEMAINE EUROPEENNE DE PREVENTION DE LA TOXICOMANIE' / 'EUROPEAN WEEK FOR DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION' (FR/EN) Sondage mars-avril 1992 / Survey carried out in March-April 1992 Rspport novembre 1992 / Report November 1992
'LA SECURITE SOCIALE' / 'SOCIAL SECURIW' Sondage mars-avril 1992 / Survey camed out in March-April 1992
'LES ATTITUDES FACE AU VIEILUSSEMENT' I 'AGE AND AITIUOESœ (FREN) Sondage mars-avril 1992 / Survey camed out in March-April 1992 Rapport janvier 1993 I Report January 1993 -36 p. c
_. - .
A50 . . - , :
(70). -LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENE ET L'ALLEMAGNE UNIE AU PRINTEMPS 1992'1 "THE EUROPEAN COMMUNrrY AND UNITED GERMANY IN SPRING 1992' (FWEN/DE) Rapport spdcial sur les rdsuttats du sondage Eurobarom4ttre No.37, mars . 1992 / Special report on the results of the March 1992 Eurobarometer survey No.37 Rapport mai 1992 / Report May 1992 -23 p.
'LA COMMUNAUTE EUROPEENE ET L'ALLEMAGNE UNIE E& AUTOMNE 1992'I 'THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND UNITED GERMANY IN AUTUMN 1992' (DEFREN) . Rapport special sur les resultats du sondage Eurobaromhe No 38, septembre-octobre 1992 / Special repon on the results of the Eurobarometer survey No 38 Rapport fdvrier 1 993 / Report- Febntery 1 993
'LE TABAGISME INVOLONTAIRE OU LA POLLUTION DES NON-FUMEURS PAR LES FUMEURS' (FREN) Sondage septembre-octobre 1992 / Survey carried out in September-October 1 992 Rapport mars 1993 / Report March 1993
'LES EUROPEENS ET LA COUR EUROPEENNE DE JUSTICE EN 1992'/"EUROPEANS AND THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE IN 1992' Sondage septembre-octobre 1992 / Survey carried out in September-October 1992
'CA SECURITE DES PRODUITS'/ 'PRODUCT SAFETY' Sondage septembre-octobre 1992 / Survey carried out in September-October 1 992
"LE MARCHE UNIQUE DES CONSOMMATEURS' / "THE CONSUMER'S SINGLE MARKET' Sondage novembre 1992 / Survey carried out in November 1992 .
'EUROPEANS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY' (EN) Sondage novembre 1992 / Survey carried out in November 1992 Rapport juin 1993 / Report June 1993
'LES EUROPEENS ET IA FAMILLE' / 'EUROPEANS AND THE FAMILY' I FR/E N) Sondage mars-avril 1993 / Survey carried out in March-April 1993 Rapport ddcembre 1993 / Report December 1993
'LES EUROPEENS ET LA SANTE ET IA SECURITE AU TRAVAIL'
Sondage mars-avril 1993 I Survey carried out in March-April 1993
- 'EUROPEANS AND HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK' (FWEN) - i ..:
'. . . .
.. . -
I
. . , .. _ . . - - .- .- . _ . . -- . - -
, . .
, .. - - - . . . ... . .
L. - . . .- - . _ -
- . . A51
'C'OPINION EUROPEENNE ETLES QUESTlONS ENERGETIQUES EN 1993'/ 'PUBLIC OPINION IN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITV ON ENERGY lN 1993'
Sondage a d l Y 993 / Survey canied out in 'AprÍ1 1993 Rapport septembre 1993 / Report September 1993
(FREN) -
'BIOTECHNOLOGIE ET GENIE GENETIOUE: CE QU'EN PENSENT LES - EUROPEENS EN 1993' I 'BIOTÈkHNOLOGY AND G E " C ENGINEERINß: WHAT EUROPEANS THINK ABOUT IT IN 1993' IFWEN) - Sondage avni 1993 / Sunmy carried out in Aprir 1993 Rapport octobre 1993 / Report October 1993
'LE MARCHE UNIQUE DES CONSOMMATEURS' / T H E CONSUMERS' M A R K F Sondage avril 1993 / Survey camed out in Aprir 1993
'EXCLUSION S O W ' 1 'SOCIAL EXCLUSION' Sondage octobre-novembre 1 993 1 Survey carried out in October-November 1993
-
'LES ATTITUDES FACE A LA TRANSFUSION SANGUINE, LE SIDA ET LE TABAGISME EN EUROPE' / 'ATTTTUDES ON BLOOD TRANSFUSION, AtOS AND TOBACCO IN EUROPE' Sondage avril-mai 1994/ Survey carried out in April-May 1994 Publication du rapport en prbparation/ Publication of report in preparation
'LES EUROPEENS ET L'ECU' / "EUROPEANS AND THE ECU' Sondage avr¡l-ma¡ 19941 survey camed out ¡n AprikMay 1994 Publication du rappon en prdparationl Publication of report in preparation
'LES ELECTIONS DU PARLEMENT EUROPEEN' / 'ELECTIONS FOR THE EUROPEAN PARUAMENT' Sondage avril-mai 19941 Survey camed out in Auril-Mav 1994 Publication du rappon en prCparationl Publication of report in preparation
. . . .
.. 1
_ . - . .
. .
. ..
*. .
.. '.
I -
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND
SOCIO-POUTICAL VARIABLES USED IN CROSSTABULATIONS
SOCIO-PROFESSIONAL STATUS
Roughly half of our representatbe sample of the EU public is without paid work. Answers to the question 'What is your occupation 7' show the following distribution:
-
OCCUPATION OF THE PERSON INTERVIEWED (n = 12.800) (weighted percentage for EU 12 + - EB41 1
Self - employed -
(1 ) .Farmer ......................................... 2% (2) fishermen ...................................... 0% (3) Professional (lawyer, medical practitioner,accountant, etc.) . .... 2% (4) Owners of shops or companies, craftsmen, self-employed persons 4% (5) Business proprietors, owner (full or partner) of a company ...... 1%
Employed
Employed professional (employed lawyer, practitioner, accountant) General management, director or top management Middle management, other management .................. Employed position, working mainly at a desk Employed position, not at a desk but travelling (salesmen, driver) . Employed position, not at a desk, but in a service job (hospital, restaurant,police, firemen, ...I ......................... Supervisors ...................................... Skilled manual workers .............................. Other (unskilled) manual workers, servants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
........... ...............
1% 1% 6% 0% 2%
6% - 1% 9% 5% .
Non -active
(1 5) Responsible for ordinary shopping and looking after the home, or without any current occupauon, not working ..................... 15%
(16) Student ........................................ 11 % (1 7 ) Unemployed or temporarily not working . . . ............... 5% (1 8 ) Retired or unable to work through illness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 %
.
Basing cross-analyses on 'occupation' would exclude half of our respondents from . . analysis. An ahsrnative, also used in past EUROBAROMETER reports, is to basa . analyses on a (non-marxist) concept of 'objective social class' wing the . occupation of the 'person who contributes most to the household income. u * 1 : reference. In order to classify as many respondents as possible with respect to .. their socio-professional sening, a new classification was created : the 'SOCIO- - . PROFESSIONAL-STATUS'. . . .
. .
.- . . . - . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ø z . - . . . . . - _. . . . . . . . -. . . .. . .
. . . . - -- - - ._ . . . . . . . - - _ . .. -
, . . .
- _ -
..;-:-r. -r ..-,- .'. .>'--> ..._. - _ r ~ .-. .: ~ . _ .
.. - . . _ - . - -. - - . . 2.- - .- - . . . . .
- .. .. . . . .
. 1. . _ I
. . - .. - - _ _ . . - .
.- - . - .A53 - .
. .
- . _
For those in paid work it is'based on their own PrOSOM occupation. Fòr those not in paid work, 'fonner occupath' was used where applicable (retired, housewife8 having been in paid work in the past, temporarily notsworking, unemployed). For those nwer having been in paid work, the occupation of the 'perron who contributes most to the household income' was used and, if the head of household was not in paid work at the time of the interview, his or her 'fonner occupation'. was used, where applicable. SOCIO-PROFESSIONAL-STATUS is, consequently, a . classification 'as close to the respondent himself/heiself as possible' but drawing . . upon additional background inforhation to the extent necessary ind available, in order to determine the interviewee's socio-professional -tus, including a maximum of respondents in the respective analyses. The resufting distribution is as follows :
- _.
. .
SOCIO-PROFESSIONAL STATUS (n = 12.800) (weighted percentages for EU 12+ - EB 41)
Self-employed
(a) Farmers/Fishermen ................................ 4%
Business proprietors, owner (full or partner) of a company ...... ....................................
-. (b) Professionals 3% (c) ShopKompany owners ............................. 8% . (d)
Employed
3% . .
Employed professionals ............................. 2% General management ............................... 4% Middle management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13% Employed position, working mainly at a desk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10% Employed position, not a t a desk but travelling (salesmen, driver, ...I 4% Employed position, not at a desk, but in a service job (hospital, restaurant, police, firemen,) . .......................... 8% Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 4% Skilled manual workers .............................. 21% Other (unskilled) manual workers, servants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9%
. . .
. .
. . - -.<* ' -5..
Othon (non-SPS attributable)
(nl 'Main income eamer. never in paid work, no answer, etc ....... 22% . ,;- .....
. . . -. .I.
.- - - :. .a
... - . . . -. . . . . , . .
. . . . . . . ..i
. . . .*--, .. -** .- . t
. i.? . . . . . . :*a . . , . . .....
... .- 4. . .
A S .
RESPONDENT OCCUPATION SCALE
is based on a combination/selection of the current respondent occupation variables: -
7 . Self employed = Farmer + Fisherman + Professional (lawyer, medical practitioner, accountant, architect, ...I + Owner of a shop, craftsmen, other self employed person + Business proprietors, owner (full or partner) of a company
2. Managers = Employed professional (employed doctor, lawyer, accountant, architect) + General management, director or top management (managing directors, director general, other director) + Middle management, other management (department head, junior manager, teacher, technician)
3. Other white collars = Employed position, working mainly at a desk + Employed position, not a t a desk but travelling (salesmen, driver, ...I
4. Manual Workers = Employed position, not at a desk, but in a service job (hospital, restaurant, police, fireman, . . .I + Supervisor + Skilled manual worker + Other (unskilled) manual worker, servant
5. House persons = Responsible for ordinary shopping and looking after the home, or without any current occupation, not working
6. Unemployed = Unemployed or temporarily not working.
. , . . . . L . . . .
. .. . ..e. _ .
- . . - SUBJECTIVE SOCIAL C U S S - . . - .
is asked by the question 'If you were asked to choose'one of these five naAs for your socid class, which would you say you belong t o ?' :
Middle class Lower middle class Working class Upper class Upper middle class Refuses to be classified m e r DK
L - . -. - i
Presented in tables are the following categories (with EU 12 weighted percentages from the Nr.41 EUROBAROMETER survey of April-May 1994) :
Working 29 % Lower Middle 13 % Middle 42 % . Upper Middle 7 % Upper 2% Other replies, n.a 8 % -
101 %
- OPINION LEADERSHIP a .
is based on the answers to the following two questions : (A) 'When you get together with your friends, would you say you discuss political maners frequently, occasionally or never?' and (E) 'When you, yourself hold a strong opinion, do you . ever find yourself persuading your friends, relatives or fellow workers to share your views? If so, does this happen often, from time to time or rarely?' <No - never > . Labels are : + + , + , -, --. Interviewees giving affirmative answers to both questions are labelled + + , Interviewees giving negative answers to both questions are labelled -. Middle categories are constituted correspondingly.
,. ' . . ... -. .. _ - . . . .
. . . - . 1
. , . . ._ - _: - . -.-. .. . . . . .. . . . , *.. r . ,. e. . ..: . . ... : d .r-
.I . ,7
. a. . I"
. . .Ca . .
. . . .?.- . . .,.
I
A56
EUROPEAN PARUAMENTARY PARTY PREFERENCE -. is based upon the question 'If there were a General Election tomorrow (say ff contact under 18 : and you had a vote), which party would you support ?' in each country in the wording usually used for this topic. Answers are grouped according to the affiliation of the representatives of the respective p a m to a group in the European Parliament. If a party is not represented in the European Parliament at the time the survey is camed out but had been represented before, ¡t's supporters are grouped with the EP group their party had been affiliated with. Supporters of parties represented in the European Parliament but their Members of the European Parliament not being affiliated to any group are labelled N.I. Supporters of parties not represented in the European Parliament are labelled "other'. Labels are presented in the order in which they figure in the "List of Members' of. the European Parliament of October 1989. Abbreviations in tables are also taken from this publication : .
Group of the European People's Party (Christian Democratic Group) S = Socialist Group PPE = LDR = Liberal and Democratic Reformist Group V = Green Group GUE = Group for the European Unitarian Left RDE = Group of the European Renewal and Democratic Alliance DR = Group Technical of the Right CG = Left Unity ARC = Rainbow Group NI = Non-attached
6
Weighted EU- average proponion of persons not indicating a pany choice ('would not vote", "spoil one's ballot', "do not answer" or "don't know') it 35 %. Consequently among those who do reply, loyal and regular supporters of tho respective panies tend to be over represented.
MEDIA USE
is based upon answers to the following question : "About how often do you...
.........
......... watch the news on television 7 read the news in the daily papers ? listen to news broadcasts on the radio ? .........
.- Everyday, several times a week, once or twice a week, less often, never Y
+ + + ......... News on N/ radio/ papers every day or several times a week Two media everyday or several timer a week; the third medium, not more than once or twice a week . One of the three media everyday or several times a week; the W o other6 not more than once or twico 8 week The three media no more than once or twice a week
+ + -
.........
......... . .
.........
. . :
e '
- . . . . .
I .
. . . -
I'
A57
L e f t
<-
2 3 4 5 6 7 0 . ..
I
. - TYPOLOGY OF EUROPEAN ATlTntDES
is based upon answers to the following quedons :.
.. .
(1) Generally speaking, do you think that (your country's) membership of the European Co"unity is : good thing; Bad thing; Neither good nor bad ? (= MEMBERSHIP)
(2) In general, are you for or against offom being made to un& Westem Europe ? For, very much; for, to s o m extent; against, to s o m extent; against, very much ( - UNIFICATION) -
I
, -
Positive 8 W d e 8 = Membership: 'good' + Unification: 'for, very much' .
"for, to some extent'
Ambivalent attitudes = Membership: 'neither good nor bad' "bad' No answer
'for, ta some extent" + Unification: Ofor, very much'
or Membership: "good'
+ Unification:
"neither good nor bad" ,
No answer 'against, to some extent" "against, very much"
or Membership: No answer 0 .
+ Unification: No answer - .
Negative anitudes =Membership: "bad" - + Unification: 'against, to some extent'
'against, very much"
SELF-PLACEMENT ON THE LEFT-RIGHT-SCALE . .
. ..
EUROPEAN SOCIAL GRADE .
(ESOMAR 7-POINT SCALE) - is based on the recommendation of the European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR) t o harmonise the measurement of social grade across borders. This approach uses three different types of input variabler (Occupation of the Main Income Eamer, Education level of the Main Income Eamw and Household purchase power operationalired as ownership of selected Durables). The combination of these input variables results in a new social grade classification with, as categories, lupper t o lower) A, B, C, O, El , .E2 , E3.
-
lnout variable 1 : Occumt ion of the Main Income Eama is based on a classification into 16 groups fE.l to E. 16) of the occupation of the
-Main Income Earner:
- E . l General management, director or top managementlb empl or + - E.2 Self employed professional - E.3 Employed professional - E.4 General management, director or top managemntl5 empl or - - E.5 Middle management, other managemnt/6 empl or + - E.6 Middle management, other management/5 empl or - - E.7 Business proprietors, owner (fulllpartner) Òf company AND owner of a shop,
craftsmen, other self employed person/6 empl or + - E.8 Employed position, working mainly at a desk - E.9 Business proprietors, owner (full/partner) of company/5 empl or - - E.10 Student - E.11 Employed position, not at a desk but travelling or in a sewice job - E.12 Farmer & Fisherman - E. 13 Responsible for ordinary shopping and looking after the home, housewife - E.14 Supervisor 6 skilled manual worker - E. 15 Other (unskilled) manual worker, servant - E.16 Retired or unable to work through illness, unemployed or temporarily not
working
h u t variable 2: Education level of the Main Income Earner is based on a classificauon Into 6 groups of education level (adjusting the finishing age of general education in accordance with extra general education or specific apprenbcsship and/or professional training):
-1. up to 14 years -2. 15 - 16 years
4. 19 - 20 years -5. 21 - 24 years -6. 25 years and over
I
. - -3. 17 - 18 years . .
. . - - . ..
1. ..-. . . . * . . - - :.:; _ _ _ . L. -.
. .. - .. .. . , -. : - - . - . - .... .i- -I.-. . . .
. - . . . . . _, - .. --_ $ 0 - ... : . . -- -. .
- . . .: , : . .. .
. . . - .. . * - . . . .- . _ . - I -
.. . . - . .
A59 '. . .. . . . .
I - _
Q
Inbut va neble 3: Household Owno rshtb ' of se lected D m is based on ownership in terms of number of products owned (list of products measured): -.
. a colour TV set, a video recorder, a video camera, > a radio-clock, . a PChome computer, a still camera, 9 .
an electric drill, an electric deep fat *er, 2 or more cars, a second home or a holiday home/flat,
Combination of imut variables ;
On the basis of all active MIE: Ed u c at io n :
Occupdon of MIE
E l + E 4 =+E6 E3+ES n + E 8 E l 1 u4 +E6
On the basis of all non active MIE (E10 + E13 + E16): Number O t products owned:
Educnion :
. . .' .
... . .. .. . --
