Greens Make Dramatic Gains Public Supports Action On Climate Change and Immigration

More Informed Voters Select a Parliament in Unprecedented Experiment
Greens Make Dramatic Gains

Public Supports Action on Climate Change and Immigration
What kind of Parliament would Europeans elect if they knew, thought, and talked
much more about the issues? An experiment just conducted in Brussels gives a picture of
how the votes for Parliament might be different.
A scientific sample of the voters of the entire European Union, representing all 27
countries, gathered for an unprecedented three-day dialogue in Brussels just before the
elections. Deliberating in 21 languages, they discussed the issues, read balanced briefing
materials, and questioned competing experts and politicians. At the end, they registered
their opinions and voting intentions in confidential questionnaires. They discussed two
issues—climate change and immigration—in detail. The result was a European Wide
―Deliberative Poll‖ conducted just before the election.1
By the end of the weekend, many of the participants had changed their views
about the issues as well as their vote intentions. They had also become more informed
and had changed their sense of identity as Europeans.
Voting Intentions
Participants were asked both before and after deliberation if they intended to vote
in the upcoming European elections. Those who intended to vote were asked which party
they preferred. As there are over 260 parties standing in the Euro elections across the 27
member states, party preferences were grouped to correspond to the European
Parliament‘s eight major party groupings.
The deliberative weekend dramatically increased support for the Greens, whose
vote share increased from 8% before deliberation to 18% after. Before the weekend,
support was strongest for the EPP (40%), PES (22%), Liberal Democrats (9%) and
Greens (8%). Afterward, the vote shares changed to 30% for the EPP, 21% for the PES,
8% for the Liberal Democrats, 2% for Independence/Democracy, 4% for the Radical
Left, 4% for the Radical Right, 3% for the EuroConservatives, and 18% Greens. Serious
deliberation on climate change significantly increased the electoral popularity of the
Greens. The electoral impact of deliberation on immigration is less clear.
Climate Change
The respondents were asked to choose between the view that ―we should do
everything possible to combat climate change even if that hurts the economy‖ and ―we
should do everything possible to maximize economic growth, even if that hurts efforts to
combat climate change.‖ Before deliberation 49% wanted to maximize combating
1
Deliberative Polling ® is a trade mark of James S. Fishkin. Any income from the trade mark is used to
support research at the Center for Deliberative Democracy, Stanford University.
1
climate change, After deliberation this rose to 61%. Similarly, respondents were asked to
choose between the view that the EU ―should reduce greenhouse gas emissions as rapidly
and as much as possible even if that means we have to make radical changes in the way
we live‖ and the contrasting view that ―the EU should make no effort to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions even if that means that climate change will get much worse.‖
Before deliberation, 72% wanted the EU to do as much as possible. After deliberation
this increased to 85%.
After deliberation the participants became more enthusiastic about energy

efficiency (increasing from 75% to 84%) and the use of an emissions trading system
(increasing from 39% to 49%). Support for renewable energy like wind and solar started
high and increased slightly (89% to 91%). But opposition to investing in nuclear energy
increased from 35% to 43% and support for investing in biofuels decreased from 55% to
50%.
Immigration
Among all participants, the belief that immigration is an important problem

increased from 44% before deliberation to 64% afterwards. Before deliberation,
participants were divided between those who want to send illegal immigrants back to
their country (23%), and a larger group (40%) that wanted to legalize them. Deliberation
left this division virtually unchanged, with equivalent figures of 22% and 40%.
Deliberation affected participants‘ views of how governments should deal with
immigration. The percentage in favour of reinforcing border controls fell from 66%
before deliberation to 59% afterwards. By contrast, those who favoured imposing
‗penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants‘ increased from 74% to 88%.
The deliberators also became more tolerant in relation to the criteria for admitting
non-EU immigrants. Before deliberation, 69% considered it important that immigrants be
committed to the receiving country‘s way of life; after deliberation only 52% did so.
There were comparable, though smaller, falls in the importance of ‗coming from a similar
culture‘ (from 25% to 17%); and in ‗being Christian‘ (13% to 9%). This increased
tolerance extended to policies for dealing with illegal immigrants living in EU countries.
Before deliberation, 63% of participants agreed that ‗illegal immigrants should be eligible
for national health care‘; afterwards, this figure increased to 71%.
Prior to deliberation, when invited to describe immigrants on a set of five
characteristics, 26% of the participants consistently viewed them negatively on all five;
32% consistently viewed them positively. After deliberation, those taking a consistently
positive view rose to 39%. For example, the percentage of respondents who considered
immigrants ‗honest‘ increased from 25% to 34%, while those agreeing that ‗immigrants
have a lot to offer our cultural life‘ rose from 37% to 43%. In a similar vein, those who
thought that ‗immigration increases crime in our society‘ fell from 48% to 40%.
2
Sample Recruitment
The survey house TNS (responsible for the Eurobarometer) interviewed a random
sample of 4,384 EU citizens eighteen years-old or older from all 27 members states. The
sample was stratified to ensure adequate representation from the smaller countries. Just
over 1300 respondents were randomly set aside to serve as a control group. Of the
remaining roughly 3,000, some 800 (who had indicated an interest in the event) were
invited to attend. Of those, 348 came to Brussels.
Representativeness
The representativeness of the 348 participants can be checked by comparing them

to the nonparticipants‖—the original 4,384 interviewees who did not attend. In terms of
age, class and other demographics, the participants and nonparticipants were very similar,
although men were slightly over-represented among participants (54%). On the standard
0 to 10 left right scale, participants and non-participants were virtually identical. The
two groups also had nearly identical pre-deliberation attitudes on climate change,
although the participants had slightly more ‗liberal‘ attitudes on immigration. The
participants were also more interested in politics, had a stronger sense of civic duty,
included somewhat more people intending (at the time of the initial interview) to vote for
the EPP supporters and somewhat fewer intending to vote for the PES. These modest
differences do not affect the results. The before-after changes in attitudes, vote
intentions, and knowledge would be approximately the same if the participants had
looked exactly the same as the nonparticipants (and thus the whole sample).
Knowledge
The participants clearly learned a great deal about both immigration and climate
change —and also about the EU. They were asked nine knowledge questions, three each
about each of those three topics. For each topic, two of those three questions were first
asked in the initial interview, while the remaining one was first asked only at the
beginning of the event some weeks later. Since the participants begin learning from the
moment they are initially interviewed and invited to the event (and are sent the briefing
materials well in advance), the six items first asked in the initial interview show a
distinctly greater gain than the three asked only on arrival (16.5% versus 7.5%). The
participants presumably learned about as much on the latter as on the former; it is just
that on the latter our earliest measurement (on arrival) occurs too late to capture all the
learning.
There was also a noticeable difference in how much the participants learned by
topic. They learned most about immigration (a 20.2% before-after knowledge gain), next
most about the EU (10.5%), and least—though still very significantly—about climate
3
change (9.9%). All these numbers are probably underestimates, because all three indices
include one item measured only from arrival.
European Citizenship
Simply participating in a Deliberative Polling event that brought together fellow
participants from across the EU had a significant effect on participants‘ attitudes towards
Europe and the EU. Before deliberation 37% of participants considered their country‘s
membership of the EU to be ‗a very good thing‘. After deliberation, this figure rose to
52%. Before deliberation, 47% of participants considered it their duty to vote in EU
elections; after, the equivalent figure was 56%. Before the event, 72% of participants
thought of themselves ―as just being from‖ their own country. After deliberation, this
percentage fell dramatically to 56%. Exposure to open political discussion among people
from all parts of the EU made people less nationalistic and fostered a sense of European
identity in addition to national identity.
Event Evaluation
The participants enjoyed and appreciated the experience of the weekend. Asked
to rate the event as a whole on 0 to 10 scale, 86% rated it at 8 or above, and 59% gave it a
perfect 10. The ratings of the plenary sessions both with politicians and with experts
were also high, with each being found useful by 74%. The ratings of the small group
discussions were still higher, with 92% finding them useful.
On average, the participants thought the event extremely balanced. Of those who
said that they had had read more than half of the briefing materials (a large majority of
the participants), roughly two-thirds saw them as balanced, and only 11% saw them as
clearly favouring some positions over others. Similarly, 69% agreed that their small
group moderator ―tried to makes sure that opposing arguments were considered, while
86% disagreed that the moderator ―sometimes tried to influence the group with her/his
ideas.‖
The participants also considered the quality of the discussion to be high. More
than 60% saw their fellow group members as participating equally in the discussion.
Almost 90% thought that they ―had ample opportunity‖ to express their own views.
84% felt that their fellow participants ―respected what I had to say, even when they didn‘t
agree.‖ They also saw their fellow participants as taking their roles seriously: 87% saw
them as ―express[ing] what was truly on their mind.‖ Only 18% considered that they
―expressed strong views without offering justifications,‖ while only 23% considered that
they ―had made up their minds [so that] the discussion had little effect on them.‖
The experience of meeting and talking with other people from all across the
continent and from all walks of life also had an impact: 81% thought that they learnt ―a
lot about people different from me—about who they are and how they live.‖
4
Dialogue with Politicians and Experts
The participants alternated small group discussions with trained moderators and
plenary sessions in which their questions, developed at length in small groups, were
directed at panels of competing experts and politicians. There were three plenaries, the
first two with experts on immigration and climate change. The final plenary, on Sunday
morning concluded with the participants directing their questions to Estonian President
Toomas Hendrik Ilves, former Italian Prime Minister Giulano Amato, former Danish
MEP Jens Peter Bonde and former Belgian Deputy Prime Minister Isabelle Durant.
Sponsors and Partners
The participating organisations are: the University of Siena – Circap, Italy; the
University of Essex, United Kingdom; the University of Mannheim, Germany;
Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques, France; University of Oslo, Arena, Norway;
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Spain; European Policy Centre,
Belgium; Avventura Urbana, Italy; TNS Opinion, Belgium; Median Research Centre,
Romania
The donors funding the project are the European Commission under the 7th Framework
Programme and a group of European foundations led by the Compagnia di San Paolo
(Italy): the King Baudouin Foundation (Belgium), the Bosch-Stiftung Foundation
(Germany) and the Open Society Foundation (Switzerland).
5
Comparison of T1 / T3 Attitudes
(if question was not asked at T1, then T2 / T3 comparison)
Mean values presented in highlighted area and percentages of collapsed categories follow. All response
options were rescaled to 0-1 .
** p < .01; * p < .05 Before After

**Q1. There will be elections for the European Parliament on
[DATE]. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means you "definitely
won't vote", '10' means you "definitely will vote", and '5' is "exactly
in between", how likely or not is it that you will vote in this
election? 0.817 0.903
Not likely to Vote (0-4) 9.7 4.3
Exactly in the middle (5) 8.9 4.6
Likely to vote (6-10) 81 85.7
Don't know 0.3 5.5
“Definitely will vote” (Categories 9 & 10) 62.9 77

(Percentage of valid cases) (63.1) (81.4)
**Q7. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "no problem at all", '10'
is "the most serious problem we face", and '5' is "exactly in the
middle", how serious a problem or not would you say immigration
is? 0.531 0.658
No problem at all (0-4) 32.4 15.1
Exactly in the middle (5) 23 19.5
The most serious problem (6-10) 44.2 64.5
Don't know 0.3 0.9
Q8b. Some people think that [COUNTRY] should send all illegal
immigrants back to the countries they came from. Suppose these
people are at one end of a 0-to-10 scale, at point 0. Other people
think that [COUNTRY] should legalize all the illegal immigrants
currently there. Suppose these people are at the other end of the
scale, at point 10. People who are exactly in the middle are at
point 5, and of course other people have opinions at other points
between 0 and 10. Where would you place your views on this
scale, or haven’t you thought much about that? 0.542 0.561
Back to the country they came from (0-4) 22.9 21.8
Legalize illegal immigrants (6-10) 39.6 43.4
Don't Know 2.6 0.9
Q9. How strongly would you agree or disagree with each of the
following statements?
**Q9_1. Illegal immigrants should be eligible for national health
care 0.655 0.716
Agree strongly 33.6 38.5
Agree somewhat 29 32.5
Neither agree nor disagree 10.9 8.9
Disagree somewhat 12.9 10.1
Disagree strongly 12.1 7.5
Don't Know 1.4 2.6
Q9_2. The children of illegal immigrants should be eligible to
attend public school 0.786 0.801
Agree somewhat 25.3 27
Neither agree nor disagree 4 6.6
Disagree strongly 8 5.7
Don't Know 1.7 2.3
**Q9_3. Decisions about what immigrants to admit should take no

account of what country they are from 0.671 0.731
Agree somewhat 24.7 28.4
Don't Know 1.4 2.6
Q10. On a 0-10 scale, where '0' is "extremely unimportant", '10' is

"extremely important", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how
important or not would you say each of the following criteria
should be in deciding what immigrants from non-EU countries
should be admitted to [COUNTRY]?
Q10_1. Having job skills that employers need 0.674 0.701
Unimportant (0-4) 15.8 10.8
Important (6-10) 69.3 69.7
Don't Know 0.9 1.4
**Q10_2. Having close family in [COUNTRY] 0.484 0.408

Important (6-10) 40.6 29.2
Don't Know 0.3 1.4
Q10_3. Being able to speak [NATIONAL LANGUAGE. WHEN

MORE THAN ONE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE, THEN LANG. 1 OR
LANG.2] 0.676 0.661
Unimportant (0) 17.8 19.8
Important (6-10) 67 63.8
Don't Know 0.9 0.9
**Q10_4. Being Christian 0.219 0.156

Important (6-10) 12.6 8.7
Don't Know 0.3 2
**Q10_5. Being White 0.105 0.072

Important (6-10) 3.5 2.6
Don't Know 0.3 2.6
Q10_6. Being able to support oneself financially 0.710 0.689
Important (6-10) 71.9 65.1
Don't Know 1.1 2
**Q10_7. Commitment to the [NATIONALITY] way of life 0.68 0.594

Important (6-10) 69.4 51.7
Don't Know 0.3 1.7
**Q10_8. Coming from a similar culture 0.353 0.295

Important (6-10) 25.2 17
Don't Know 0.3 1.7
Q11. And how strongly would you favour or oppose each of the
following?
**Q11_1. Reinforcing border controls 0.712 0.656
Favour strongly 39.4 29.9
Favour somewhat 27.3 28.7
Neither favour nor oppose 15.5 16.7
Oppose somewhat 10.6 17
Oppose strongly 6 5.2
Don't Know 1.1 2.6
**Q11_2. Imposing penalties on employers who hire illegal

immigrants 0.769 0.879
Favour strongly 53.4 63.8
Favour somewhat 20.7 23.6
Neither favour nor oppose 10.9 6.3
Oppose somewhat 6.3 2.3
Oppose strongly 7.2 1.1
Don't Know 1.4 2.9
*Q12. Generally speaking, what is your opinion on the number of

people living in [COUNTRY] who are not citizens of the European
Union countries? Are there...? 0.646 0.62
Far too many 16.4 10.9
Somewhat too many 23.9 30.5
About the right number 41.1 35.1
Somewhat too few 4.3 8.9
Far too few 1.7 1.4
Don't Know 12.6 13.2
**Q13_1. The contributions from working immigrants will help
maintain the pension system 0.702 0.76
Don't Know 2.3 2
Q13_2. Immigration increases crime in our society 0.545 0.519

Disagree somewhat 21 24.4
Don't Know 2 1.4
Q13_3. Amnesty given to illegal immigrants will increase illegal

immigration 0.654 0.689
Agree strongly 31.3 29
Agree somewhat 27 34.8
Don't Know 2.6 4
*Q14. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

have a lot to offer to [COUNTRY]’s cultural life, 10 means that
immigrants threaten the [NATIONALITY] culture, and 5 is exactly
in the middle, where would you position yourself on this scale, or
haven’t you thought much about that? 0.431 0.400
Immigrants have a lot to offer to [COUNTRY]'s cultural life (0-4) 37.1 42.7
Immigrants threaten [NATIONALITY] culture (6-10) 18.3 15
Don't know 3.7 2
Q15. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that Muslim

immigrants have a lot to offer to [COUNTRY]’s cultural life, 10
means that Muslim immigrants threaten [NATIONALITY] culture,
and 5 is exactly in the middle, where would you position yourself
on this scale, or haven’t you thought much about that? 0.485 0.509
Muslim immigrants have a lot to offer to [COUNTRY]'s cultural life
(0-4) 34.3 32.6
Muslim immigrants threaten [NATIONALITY] culture (6-10) 31.1 33.8
Don't Know 3.4 4
Q16. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

take jobs from native-born [NATIONALITY], 10 means that
immigrants take the sorts of jobs that [NATIONALITY] don't want
and 5 is exactly in the middle, where would you position yourself
on this scale, or haven’t you thought much about that? 0.668 0.686
Immigrants take jobs from native-born [NATIONALITY] (0-4) 15.1 11
Immigrants take the sorts of jobs that [NATIONALITY] don't want
(6-10) 58.4 62.4
Don't Know 3.4 2.6
Q17. Of all the immigrants in [COUNTRY], what percentage do
you think are there illegally? Please answer with a number
between 0 and 100. 25.99 26.34
Q18. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

contribute more in taxes than they benefit from health and welfare
services, 10 means that immigrants benefit more from health and
welfare services than they contribute in taxes, and 5 is exactly in
the middle, where would you position yourself on this scale, or
Immigrants contribute more in taxes than benefit from health and
welfare services (0-4) 16.4 20.4
Immigrants benefit more from health and welfare services than
they contribute in taxes (6-10) 40.4 42.2
Don't know 12.6 6.6
Q19. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

"completely", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how much would
you say each of the following describes immigrants living here?
**Q19_1. Honest 0.529 0.568
Not at all (0-4) 14.6 13.3
Completely (6-10) 25.5 33.9
Don't know 10.9 9.5
*Q19_2. Hard-working 0.604 0.628

Not at all (0-4) 12.2 11.6
Completely (6-10) 49.9 54.3
Don't know 6 6
**Q19_3. Law-abiding 0.488 0.525

Not at all (0-4) 31.6 27
Completely (6-10) 23.9 31.2
Don't know 9.5 7.8
Q19_4. Respectful of women 0.462 0.477

Not at all (0-4) 33.6 36.8
Exactly in the middle (5) 35.6 27
Completely (6-10) 17.7 24.8
Don't know 12.9 11.5
**Q19_5. Tolerant 0.445 0.481

Not at all (0-4) 35.9 31.6
Completely (6-10) 19.2 23.6
Don't know 10.9 9.5
**Q20. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "no problem at all",

'10' is "the most serious problem we face", and '5' is "exactly in the
middle", how serious a problem or not would you say global
climate change is? 0.753 0.831
Not a serious problem (0-4) 8.9 4.3
Serious problem (6-10) 77.3 88.5
Don't Know 0.6 0
**Q21. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that we should

do everything possible to combat climate change, even if that
hurts the economy, '10' means that we should do everything
possible to maximize economic growth, even if that hurts efforts to
combat climate change and 5 is exactly in the middle, where
would you position yourself on this scale, or haven’t you thought
much about that? 0.414 0.329
Combat climate change (0-4) 49.1 60.9
Maximize economic growth (6-10) 24.7 16.6
Don't Know 2.9 1.4
Q22b. How strongly would you agree or disagree with each of

**Q22b_1. Manufacturers should be required to produce
automobiles that need less fuel per mile driven, even if that means
that they cost more to buy 0.763 0.8
Don't Know 2.6 0.9
*Q22b_2. Energy from renewable sources will be less expensive

than energy from fossil fuels - such as coal, oil and gas - in the
long run 0.788 0.82
Don't Know 5.5 3.7
**Q23. What should the EU do about its existing climate change

targets? Should it…? 0.777 0.836
Increase them (greatly, somewhat) 79.1 85.9
Leave them as they are 12.1 10.1
Decrease them (greatly, somewhat) 5.4 3.2
Don't know 3.4 0.9
*Q24. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that energy

should be produced in ways that minimize greenhouse gas
emissions even if that means that energy costs more, '10' means
that energy should be produced as cheaply as possible even if
that means more greenhouse gas emissions, and 5 is exactly in
the middle, where would you position yourself on this scale, or
Energy should be produced in ways that minimize greenhouse
gas emissions (0-4) 69.2 75
Energy should be produced as cheaply as possible (6-10) 10.8 9.4
Don't know 1.7 0.6
**Q25. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that [COUNTRY]

should do as much as it can to halt climate change, even if others
do less, '10' means that [COUNTRY] should only do as much as
other countries do, and 5 is exactly in the middle, where would
you position yourself on this scale, or haven’t you thought much
about that? 0.383 0.319
[COUNTRY] should do as much as it can to halt climate change
(0-4) 56.2 66.3
[COUNTRY] should only do as much as other countries do (6-10) 24.7 18.4
Don't know 2.3 1.4
**Q26. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that the EU

should reduce greenhouse gas emissions as rapidly and as much
as possible even if that means that we have to make radical
changes in the way we live, '10' means that the EU should make
no effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even if that means
that climate change gets much worse and '5' is exactly in the
middle, where would you position yourself on this scale, or haven’t
you thought much about that? 0.252 0.193
EU should do as much as it can to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions 72.2 84.7
Exactly in the middle 17.8 9.8
EU should make no effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 7.2 4
Don't know 2.9 1.4
Q27. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "no priority at all", '10' is
"the highest priority", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how much
priority should be given to each of the following as a way of
tackling climate change?
Q27_1. Spending more on new technologies to capture and store
carbon emissions 0.639 0.649
No priority at all (0-4) 15.3 16.9
The highest priority (6-10) 56.1 59.5
Don't know 10.3 6.3
**Q27_2. Spending more on improving energy efficiency 0.761 0.817

Don't know 6.9 4
**Q27_3. Investing more in biofuels 0.642 0.59

The highest priority (6-10) 55.2 50
Don't know 6.3 5.5
**Q27_4. Investing more in nuclear energy 0.473 0.433
No priority at all (0-4) 35 42.8
Don't know 10.1 6.6
*Q27_5. Investing more in renewable energy sources like wind,

hydro, wave and solar power 0.871 0.896
Don't know 2.3 1.7
**Q27_6. Reducing the quantity of goods and services we

consume 0.583 0.633
Don't know 5.7 3.4
*Q27_7. Making more use of emissions trading systems and other

financial and tax incentives 0.564 0.599
No priority at all (0-4) 17 15
The highest priority (6-10) 39 48.6
Don't know 14.9 6.6
**Q27_8. Educating people about renewable energy and energy

conservation. 0.861 0.902
No priority at all (0-4) 4 3.7
The highest priority (6-10) 86 90.8
Don't know 4 1.7
**Q27_9. Getting people and businesses to use less energy 0.816 0.855
Don't know 3.7 2
Q28. What percentage of the EU’s total energy consumption

would you like to see come from the following energy sources? I’ll
ask them one at a time. Please answer with numbers between '0'
and '100'.
Q28_1. Fossil fuels 20.45 20.00
**Q28_2. Biofuels 20.17 17.05
Q28_3. Nuclear power 20.62 18.91
**Q28_4. Renewables such as hydro, wind, and solar 45.61 51.19
Q29. And what percentage of the EU’s total energy consumption

would you say currently comes from each of those same sources?
*Q29_1. Fossil fuels 58.43 61.23
Q29_2. Biofuels 8.86 8.01
Q29_3. Nuclear power 23.01 22.3
*Q29_4. Renewables such as hydro, wind, and solar 13.43 11.85
Q31. And on a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means "entirely at the
EU level", '10' means "entirely by the individual Member States",
and '5' is "exactly in the middle", at what level do you think
decisions should be made in each of the following areas?
Q31_1. Immigration 0.503 0.511
Entirely at the EU level (0-4) 30.8 27.9
Entirely by the individual MS (6-10) 31.5 33.9
Don't know 2.3 1.4
Q31_2. Climate change 0.334 0.31

Don't know 2.3 1.7
Q31_3.Fighting unemployment 0.602 0.599

Entirely at the EU level (0-4) 20 21
Don't know 2 2.3
Q31_4. Fighting crime 0.545 0.577

Entirely by the individual MS (6-10) 38 42.3
Don't know 1.7 2.3
Q32. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that decisions

made at the EU level should require the unanimous agreement of
all the Member States, '10' means that decisions made at the EU
level should require only the agreement of Member States
representing a large majority of the EU’s population and '5' is
exactly in the middle, where would you position yourself on this
scale, when it comes to...or haven’t you thought much about that?
And where would you position yourself on this scale when it
comes to...?
Q32_1. Illegal immigration 0.484 0.502
Unanimous agreement of the member states (0-4) 35.8 38.5
Agreement of member states representing a majority of EU's
population (6-10) 34.7 36.2
Don't know 4.9 2.3
Q32_2. Legal immigration including asylum 0.503 0.534

population (6-10) 34.2 38.5
Don't know 5.2 3.2
Q32_3. Climate change 0.488 0.508
population (6-10) 36.2 40.7
Don't know 3.7 2.6
*Q33a. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

"completely", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how much would
you say you think of yourself as being European? 0.71 0.739
Not European (0-4) 14.4 10.8
European (6-10) 69.6 69.8
Don't Know 0.3 1.4
**Q33b. And on the same 0 to 10 scale, how much would you say
you think of yourself as just being from your [COUNTRY]? 0.768 0.664
Not from [Country] (0-4) 15.2 21.5
From [Country] (6-10) 72.5 56.3
Don't Know 0 2.3
Q34. And if you had to choose just one of the following

alternatives, what would you say you see yourself as…?
[NATIONALITY] only 14.4 6
[NATIONALITY] and European 60.3 67.8
European and [NATIONALITY] 19 18.7
European only 2.6 2.9
None of the above 3.4 1.7
Don't know 0.3 2.9
**Q35. Generally speaking, do you think that [COUNTRY]'s

membership of the European Union is...? 0.776 0.852
A very good thing 36.5 52.3
A fairly good thing 42.5 37.1
Neither good nor bad 15.5 7.2
A fairly bad thing 3.2 1.1
A very bad thing 1.7 0.9
Don't Know 0.6 1.4
**Q36. On a 0 to 10 scale, where '0' means that [COUNTRY] has

"not benefitted at all" from being a member of the EU, '10' means
it has "benefited enormously", and '5' is "exactly in the middle",
using this scale, would you say that on balance [COUNTRY] has
benefited or not benefited from being a member of the EU? 0.664 0.714
Not benefited (0-4) 13.1 6.7
Benefited (6-10) 62.4 68.6
Don't Know 0.9 2.9
Q37. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

"passionately", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how interested or
not would you say you generally are in politics? 0.672 0.665
Not passionate (0-4) 15.2 12.6
Passionate (6-10) 69.4 64.4
Don't Know 0.3 1.1
Q40. How much of a difference would you say it makes who is in
power in [COUNTRY]? 0.720 0.705
A great deal 41.4 39.9
Somewhat 38.8 38.8
Not very much 14.4 15.2
Not at all 3.2 4
Don't know 2.3 2
*Q41. How much would you say that what happens to the EU as a
whole affects people like you? 0.675 0.71
A great deal 29.6 33.6
Somewhat 49.4 49.4
Not very much 17.2 13.5
Not at all 1.4 1.4
Don't know 2.3 2
**Q42_1. You would be seriously neglecting your duty as a citizen
if you didn’t vote in elections for the European Parliament 0.789 0.823
Agree somewhat 29 23
Don't know 4 2.6
*Q42_2. Sometimes politics and the government seem so

complicated that a person like you can't really understand what's
going on 0.546 0.584
Don't know 3.4 2.9
**Q42_3. You have opinions about politics that are worth listening
to 0.662 0.704
Don't know 8.9 6
Q52. Here are some things that people find more or less important
for themselves or society to have. On a scale of 0 to 10, where '0'
is "not at all important", '10' is "extremely important", and '5' is
"exactly in the middle", how important or not would you say each
of the following is to you?
Q52_1. Leaving people and companies free to compete
economically 0.627 0.633
Not at all important (0-4) 12.6 10.6
Extremely important (6-10) 46.2 48.8
Don't know 6.9 5.7
Q52_2. Preserving our traditions and customs 0.707 0.697

Don't know 4.3 2.6
Q52_3. Promoting economic growth 0.704 0.708

Extremely important (6-10) 68.9 69
Don't know 4.6 4
Q52_4. Keeping our air and water clear 0.905 0.912

Not at all important (0-4) 0.6 2
Don't know 2.9 3.2
Q52_5. Protecting the planet 0.902 0.914

Don't know 3.2 2.6
Q52_6. Getting to know people from different backgrounds 0.760 0.780

Don’t know 4.3 3.4
Knowledge Items*
Q43. Is the main decision-making body of the European Union
the…?
Correct Answer: Council of Ministers 10.1 23.6
All else (including 'decline to answer') 89.9 76.4
Q44. Only one of the following statements about the European

Parliament is false. Which one is it?
Correct Answer: It passes all EU laws 11.8 23.6
Q45, Is the European Union represented on the international

stage by the…?
Correct Answer: European Commission 39.9 46
All else (including 'decline to answer') 60.1 54
Q46. Which of the following is true of Blue card workers?

Correct Answer: They must have university education 6.6 30.5
Q47. Which of the following is true about the ways in which

immigration policy is currently made?
Correct Answer: The EU sets the basic rules about entry and
residency requirements 22.1 46.8
Q48. Which of the following is true of the EU's immigrants?

Correct Answer: Most illegal immigrants enter the EU legally but
outstay their visas 44.5 56.6
Q49. The percentage of the EU's total energy consumption that

comes from fossil fuels (coal, gas or oil) is about …?
Correct Answer: 80% 22.4 30.2
Q50, Which of the following produces the most greenhouse

gases?
Correct Answer: China 45.7 63.2
Q51. Which of the following is true about wind power in the

European Union?
Correct Answer: Wind power's share of EU energy consumption is
increasing by about roughly 30% a year 15.5 19.8
Knowledge Index
T1 Mean (based on six items) 0.198
T2 Mean (based on nine items) 0.296
T3 Mean (based on nine items) 0.378
* See separate document for a more detailed analysis of ‘Knowledge gain’.
Knowledge Gain (Based on All Available Items)
Item Before After Gain
The EU
Is the main decision-making body of the European
Union the…? (Council of Ministers) 10.1% 23.6% 13.5%***
Only one of the following statements about the
European Parliament is false. Which one is it? (It passes
all EU laws) 11.8 23.6 11.8***
Is the European Union represented on the international
stage by the…? (European Commission)† 39.9 46.0 6.1*
Immigration
Which of the following is true of Blue card workers?
(They must have university education) 6.6 30.5 23.9***
Which of the following is true about the ways in which
immigration policy is currently made? (The EU sets the
basic rules about entry and residency requirements) 22.1 46.8 24.7***
Which of the following is true of the EU's immigrants?
(Most illegal immigrants enter the EU legally but
outstay their visas)† 44.5 56.7 12.1***
Climate Change
The percentage of the EU's total energy consumption
that comes from fossil fuels (coal, gas or oil) is about
…? (80%) 22.4 30.2 7.8**
Which of the following produces the most greenhouse
gases? (China) 45.7 63.2 17.5***
Which of the following is true about wind power in the
European Union? (Wind power's share of EU energy
consumption is increasing by about roughly 30% a
year)† 15.5 19.8 4.3*
Average when “before” = initial interview (6 items) 19.8 36.3 16.5***
Average when “before” = arrival (3 items) 33.3 40.8 7.5***
Average for EU (3 items) 20.6 31.0 10.5***
Average for Immigration (3 items) 24.4 44.6 20.2***
Average for Climate Change (3 items) 27.9 37.7 9.9***
NOTE: Entries are percentages answering correctly. The correct answers are given in
parentheses.
†Before = arrival rather than initial interview.
*significant at the .05 level; **significant at the .01 level, ***significant at the .001 level.
Vote Intentions Comparison Participants T1-T3, weighted
Participants T1 Percent Participants T3 Percent

EPP 40 30
PES 22 21
ALDE 9 8
Greens/EFA 8 18
IND/DEM 0.5 2
Other left wing 6 4
Other right wing 4 4
Libertas / Euroconservatives 5 3
DK 6 11
Will Not Vote excluded from the percentage base

Question Percent
Q63. How much of the briefing material you were sent would you say
you have read?
Have not read or have just glanced at it 3.6
Have read less than half of it 8.3
Have read about half of it 15.8
Have read more than half of it 18.5
Have read all or nearly all of it 53.9
Don’t know/no answer 0.2
Q64. On a 0 to 10 scale, where ‘0’ means “the briefing material clearly
favoured some positions over others”, ‘10’ means “completely
balanced”, and ‘5’ is exactly “in the middle”, how balanced or not would
you say the briefing material was? (Responses among those who read
‘all’ or ‘more than half’ the document.)
Favoured some positions (0-4 on 0-10 scale) 10.7
Exactly in the middle (5) 22.2
Balanced (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 65.4
Q65. On a 0 to 10 scale, where '0' means "a complete waste of time",
'10' means "extremely useful" and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how
useful or not were each of the following elements in clarifying your
thinking about these issues?
Q65_1. Participating in the small group discussions
Waste of time (0-4 on 0-10 scale) 0.9
Useful (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 91.7
Q65_2. Meeting and talking to other participants outside of the formal
discussions
Q65_3. Participating in the plenary session with experts
Q65_4. Participating in the plenary session with politicians
Q65_5. The briefing document
Q65_6. The event as a whole
Waste of time (0-4 on 0-10 scale) 0
Q66. On a 0 to 10 scale, where '0' means "completely disagree", '10'

means "completely agree", and '5' is "exactly in the middle", how
strongly would you agree or disagree with each of the following
statements is?
Q66_1. The members of my small group participated equally in the
discussion
Disagree (0-4 on 0-10 scale) 23.9
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 62.1
Q66_2. My small group moderator sometimes tried to influence the
group with her/ his ideas
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 6.6
Q66_3. My small group moderator tried to make sure that opposing
arguments were considered
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 69.3
Q66_4. I learned a lot about people different from me – about who they
are and how they live
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 81.3
Don’t know/no answer 2
Q66_5. I had ample opportunity in the small group discussions to
express my views
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 88.5
Q66_6. I kept some of my thoughts to myself for fear of the reactions of
others
Exactly in the middle (5) 9,8
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 19.5
Q66_7. Most participants seemed to mainly care about their own
country and not about the European Union
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 27.6
Q66_8. My fellow participants respected what I had to say, even when
they didn’t agree
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 84.2
Q66_9. Despite simultaneous translations I had problems to follow the
debate as if it were in my own language
Exactly in the middle (5) 4
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 12.1
Q66_10. Overall, I feel that people expressed what was truly on their
mind.
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 86.8
Q66_11. Many people expressed strong views without offering
justifications
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 17.9
Q66_12. Most people had made up their minds and the discussion had
little effect on them
Agree (6-10 on 0-10 scale) 23.3
EuroPolis 2009
Representativeness Analysis: Participants vs. Non-participants
Note. Percentages shown with cell frequencies in parentheses. All significance tests
are two-sample t-tests unless otherwise noted. *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.001.
Participants (N) Non-participants (N)
Gender **
Female 47.41% 54.86%
(165) (1490)
Male 52.59% 45.14%
(183) (1226)
Total 100% 100%
(348) (2716)
Age in years 48.75 years 48.45 years

(348) (2716)
Education (Two indicators)

***Age of completion 21.09 years 19.34 years
(310) (2495)
** % still in school1 8.33% 5.3%
(29) (143)
Nationality2 ***
Belgium 1.44% (5) 2.54% (69)
Denmark 1.44% (5) 0.29% (8)
Germany 16.38% (57) 10.27% (279)
Greece 1.72% (6) 2.06% (56)
Spain 8.62% (30) 12.89% (350)
Finland 1.15% (4) 0.59% (16)
France 12.07% (42) 11.45% (311)
Ireland 1.72% (6) 0.15% (4)
Italy 10.63% (37) 11.52% (313)
Luxembourg 0.57% (2) 1.80% (49)
Netherlands 3.45% (12) 2.87% (78)
Austria 1.72% (6) 0.88% (24)
Portugal 1.72% (6) 1.99% (54)
Sweden 1.72% (6) 0.92% (25)
United Kingdom 9.77% (34) 11.63% (316)
Bulgaria 1.15% (4) 0.96% (26)
Cyprus 0.86% (3) 1.73% (47)
Czech Republic 0.86% (3) 2.61% (71)
Estonia 1.72% (6) 0.26% (7)
Hungary 1.72% (6) 1.99% (54)
Latvia 1.44% (5) 0.18% (5)
Lithuania 1.44% (5) 0.22% (6)
Malta 0.86% (3) 1.73% (47)
Poland 8.62% (30) 12.89% (350)
Romania 3.74% (13) 5.04% (137)
1
EuroPolis 2009
Slovakia 1.72% (6) 0.26% (7)

Slovenia 1.72% (6) 0.26% (7)
Total 100% 100%
(348) (2716)
Voting Intention,
10-point scale (N) ***
Leaning toward not voting (0 – 4) 9.8% 20.18%
(34) (535)
Exactly in the middle 8.9% 14.64%
(31) (388)
Leaning toward voting (6 – 10) 82.27% 65.18%
(282) (1728)
Average 8.12 6.91
(347) (2651)
Class (N) ***

Upper Class 1.48% 1.40%
(5) (37)
Upper-middle Class 38.17% 24.88%
(129) (659)
Lower-middle Class 34.32% 33.67%
(116) (892)
Working Class 23.96% 38.28%
(81) (1014)
None of above 2.07% 1.77%
(7) (47)
Total 100% 100%
(338) (2649)
Religion (N) *
Catholic 49.56% 53.56%
(168) (1401)
Orthodox 8.85% 10.05%
(30) (263)
Protestant 11.50% 8.98%
(39) (235)
Other Christian 4.42% 5.24%
(15) (137)
Jewish 0.29% 0.19%
(1) (5)
Muslim 0.59% 0.46%
(2) (12)
Sikh 0.00% 0.00%
(0) (0)
Buddhist 0.88% 0.23%
(3) (6)
Hindu 0.59% 0.04%
(2) (1)
2
EuroPolis 2009
Atheist / Agnostic 23.30% 21.25%

(79) (556)
Total 100% 100%
(339) (2616)
Attend religious services (N)

More than once /wk 3.18% 5.19%
(11) (139)
Once a week 18.79% 18.44%
(65) (494)
About once a mo. 10.69% 10.82%
(37) (290)
Once every 2-3 mo. 7.51% 7.84%
(26) (210)
Only special occas. 14.74% 15.08%
(51) (404)
About once a year 10.40% 9.00%
(36) (241)
Less often 10.12% 8.47%
(35) (227)
Never 24.57% 25.16%
(85) (674)
Total 100% 100%
(346) (2679)
Birthplace
Home country 92.82% 95.54%
(323) (2593)
Other EU country 5.17% 2.43%
(18) (66)
Non-EU country 0.57% 0.59%
(2) (16)
Asia, Africa, or Latin America 1.15% 1.29%
(4) (35)
North American, Japan, or Oceania 0.29% 0.15%
(1) (4)
Total 100% 100%
(348) (2714)
Parents’ Birthplace
Both parents born in home country 88.18% 91%
(306) (2467)
One parent born in home country and 3.17% 2.99%
other parent born in other EU country (11) (81)
Both parents born in other EU 4.03% 2.55%
country (14) (69)
At least one parent born outside of 4.61% 3.47%
EU country (16) (94)
Total 100% 100%
3
EuroPolis 2009
(347) (2711)
Left-Right Scale
(10-point, 0=Left)
% Left-leaning (0 – 4) 35.05% 31.52%
(116) (755)
% Exactly in the middle (5) 30.82% 32.57%
(102) (780)
% Right-leaning (6 – 10) 34.14% 35.91%
(113) (860)
Average 5.06 5.18
(331) (2395)
1 Two-sample test of proportion. 2 Pearson’s chi-square test of independence.

Greens Make Dramatic Gains Public Supports Action On Climate Change and Immigration

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Greens Make Dramatic Gains Public Supports Action On Climate Change and Immigration

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

More Informed Voters Select a Parliament in Unprecedented Experiment

Greens Make Dramatic Gains

After deliberation the participants became more enthusiastic about energy

Among all participants, the belief that immigration is an important problem

The representativeness of the 348 participants can be checked by comparing them

Sponsors and Partners

** p < .01; * p < .05 Before After

“Definitely will vote” (Categories 9 & 10) 62.9 77

**Q9_3. Decisions about what immigrants to admit should take no

Q10. On a 0-10 scale, where '0' is "extremely unimportant", '10' is

**Q10_2. Having close family in [COUNTRY] 0.484 0.408

Q10_3. Being able to speak [NATIONAL LANGUAGE. WHEN

**Q10_4. Being Christian 0.219 0.156

**Q10_5. Being White 0.105 0.072

**Q10_7. Commitment to the [NATIONALITY] way of life 0.68 0.594

**Q10_8. Coming from a similar culture 0.353 0.295

**Q11_2. Imposing penalties on employers who hire illegal

*Q12. Generally speaking, what is your opinion on the number of

Q13_2. Immigration increases crime in our society 0.545 0.519

Q13_3. Amnesty given to illegal immigrants will increase illegal

*Q14. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

Q15. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that Muslim

Q16. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

Q18. On a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means that immigrants

Q19. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

*Q19_2. Hard-working 0.604 0.628

**Q19_3. Law-abiding 0.488 0.525

Q19_4. Respectful of women 0.462 0.477

**Q19_5. Tolerant 0.445 0.481

**Q20. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "no problem at all",

**Q21. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that we should

Q22b. How strongly would you agree or disagree with each of

*Q22b_2. Energy from renewable sources will be less expensive

**Q23. What should the EU do about its existing climate change

*Q24. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that energy

**Q25. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that [COUNTRY]

**Q26. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that the EU

**Q27_2. Spending more on improving energy efficiency 0.761 0.817

**Q27_3. Investing more in biofuels 0.642 0.59

*Q27_5. Investing more in renewable energy sources like wind,

**Q27_6. Reducing the quantity of goods and services we

*Q27_7. Making more use of emissions trading systems and other

**Q27_8. Educating people about renewable energy and energy

Q28. What percentage of the EU’s total energy consumption

Q29. And what percentage of the EU’s total energy consumption

Q31_2. Climate change 0.334 0.31

Q31_3.Fighting unemployment 0.602 0.599

Q31_4. Fighting crime 0.545 0.577

Q32. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' means that decisions

Q32_2. Legal immigration including asylum 0.503 0.534

*Q33a. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

Q34. And if you had to choose just one of the following

**Q35. Generally speaking, do you think that [COUNTRY]'s

**Q36. On a 0 to 10 scale, where '0' means that [COUNTRY] has

Q37. On a scale from 0 to 10, where '0' is "not at all", '10' is

*Q42_2. Sometimes politics and the government seem so

Q52_2. Preserving our traditions and customs 0.707 0.697

Q52_3. Promoting economic growth 0.704 0.708

Q52_4. Keeping our air and water clear 0.905 0.912

Q52_5. Protecting the planet 0.902 0.914

Q52_6. Getting to know people from different backgrounds 0.760 0.780

Q44. Only one of the following statements about the European

Q45, Is the European Union represented on the international