The changing state of. public debate on. development? Jennifer vanheerde-hudson David Hudson

Transcription

1 Provoked The changing state of Angry 50 Hopeful public debate on Anxious 25 Proud development? Jennifer vanheerde-hudson David Hudson Unhappy Sad 0 Happy Content 2016 Annual Meeting of the OECD Development Communication Network (DevCom) Paris, 9-10 November 2016 Fed up Indifferent Relaxed

2 4. Key insights 1. AAT Data & design Key findings 2. SDGs Awareness Attainability & importance Can we move people? 3. Refugee crisis What do people say, think & feel Opportunity or risk? 6 things we know about building public support for development

3 4. Key insights 1. AAT Data & design Key findings 2. SDGs Awareness Attainability & importance Can we move people? 3. Refugee crisis What do people say, think & feel Opportunity or risk? 6 things we know about building public support for development

4 18 actions analysées par l'aid Attitudes Tracker entre regardé les actualités discuté avec des amis partagé un article interagi avec une communauté rédigé un blog utilisé votre voix % des personnes qui ont déclaré avoir fait l'action au cours des 12 derniers mois 60% 40% 20% 0% 60% 40% 20% 0% 60% 40% 20% 0% 53% 47% 48% 50% 53% 52% 47% 42% 44% 46% 49% 48% 13% 14% 14% 15% 19% 21% 17% 15% 15% 13% 15% 14% 17% 17% 16% 17% 21% 22% 11% 11% 11% 14% 13% 11% 4% 5% 4% 4% 5% 5% 6% 6% 5% 5% 7% 6% 6% 7% 6% 7% 8% 9% 2% 3% 2% 3% 4% 4% 5% 7% 6% 7% 9% 9% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 4% 4% 5% 4% 6% 5% 6% 7% 8% 18% 18% 17% 17% 21% 23% utilisé des outils en ligne donné de l'argent récolté de l'argent bénévole en France bénévole à l'étranger acheté ou boycotté des produits 20% 18% 19% 17% 20% 22% voté organisé une communauté mettre en place une organisation contacté un parlementaire contacté un parlementaire en ligne participé à une marche 4% 5% 5% 6% 7% 7% 1 (déc. 2013) 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016) 1 (déc. 2013) 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016) 1 (déc. 2013) 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016) 1 (déc. 2013) vagues 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016) 1 (déc. 2013) 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016) 1 (déc. 2013) 2 (juil. 2014) 3 (déc. 2014) 4 (mai 2015) 5 (déc. 2015) 6 (juin 2016)

5 4. Key insights 1. AAT Data & design Key findings 2. SDGs Awareness Attainability & importance Can we move people? 3. Refugee crisis What do people say, think & feel Opportunity or risk? 6 things we know about building public support for development

6 Knowledge of the SDGs / Global Goals Data from Nov-Dec Questions being re-run this Nov and Dec

7 HUNGER & POVERTY GOALS ARE SEEN TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT, BUT NOT ATTAINABLE BY 2030 End hunger SDG Importance End poverty Preserving terrestrial Make cities inclusive ecosystems Promote peaceful societies Conserve the oceans Ensure healthy lives Equitable quality education Gender equality Management of water/sanitation Sustainable economic growth Combat climate change Affordable/sustainable energy Build resilient infrastructure Reduce inequality Ensure sustainable consumption Global partnerships US Engaged Public Attainable by 2030 *Vertical gridline is the average importance of the SDG; horizontal gridline is the average perceived likelihood that an SDG will be achieved by 2030 QSDG3. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to cover a broad range of issues. Which do you think are most important for improving the quality of life for people around the world? QSDG4-20. Do you think each of the following will or will not be achieved by 2030? Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 12

8 Understand and listen to your audiences People are inherently sceptical (c.40%); not necessarily opposed (30%) We need to start from where people are at, i.e. what they believe to be important and attainable But we don t need to limit ourselves to that there is a role for preferenceshaping as well as preference-taking comms Good comms and good programming are not necessarily aligned so we should be careful about not undermining programming with unrealistic representations of development There is space for some more grown-up conversations about development with the public

9 Can we move people? The Sustainable Development Goals are targets to be met by 2030 that will address the world s most important challenges, including ending poverty and hunger, improving health and education and combating climate change. In practice, do you think the Sustainable Development Goals generally will or will not be achieved? Will be achieved by 2030 Will be achieved but later than 2030 Will not be achieved Don t know Sample split into 5 groups, 1 control group that received the above statement and 4 others that were told about MDG success or failure and what was achieved or how far is still to go

10 Can we move people? Valence Negative Positive Failure Progress Success

11 Can we move people? 1. Yes, we can move people We can reduce their belief that the SDGs are unattainable But this doesn t change people s minds about whether the SDGs are a good or bad idea 2. Some information even when bad doesn t appear to damage public perceptions 3. It is proof of success that significantly reduces people s belief that the SDGs cannot be achieved

12 Can we move people? 1. Yes, we can move people We can reduce their belief that the SDGs are unattainable But this doesn t change people s minds about whether the SDGs are a good or bad idea 2. Some information even when bad doesn t appear to damage public perceptions 3. It is proof of success that significantly reduces people s belief that the SDGs cannot be achieved

13 Can we move people? 1. Yes, we can move people. We can reduce their belief that the SDGs are unattainable But this doesn t change people s minds about whether the SDGs are a good or bad idea 2. Some information even when bad doesn t appear to damage public perceptions 3. It is proof of success that significantly reduces people s belief that the SDGs cannot be achieved

14 4. Key insights 1. AAT Data & design Key findings 2. SDGs Awareness Attainability & importance Can we move people? 3. Refugee crisis What do people say, think & feel Opportunity or risk? 6 things we know about building public support for development

15 Thinking about refugees coming to [country], what do you personally think should be done to stop refugees from coming here, if anything?

16 So what do people say? countri better stay home world aid place reason extern syria tri condit alreadi financi want ensur everyth can build human govern intern land local nation polit eus strict understand action muslim away terrorist made shut order call especi measur risk alon accommod feel futur rebuild involv mediterranean stabil russia next refug sea prohibit necessari although troubl apart transit happi miseri worth rich easili negoti select late rescu citi littl space born occur win dark refuge come need prevent peopl can get think will done limit immedi right good first one camp just sweden accept receiv without safe now question reject may check even quota use unit law realli rather cours new life quick resourc lot far welfar shall issu matter etc man handl bad lack filter immigr noth benefit allow stop check make peopl work job system migrant need entri come enter think like year illeg hous let age law britain skill sure abl live want free pay etc first fair vet tax one kind control take asylum give requir money much mani care reduc enough rulecontribut resid stricter set permit let increas remov cultur clear respons seeker crime way grant inform instead less seek learn start effect import site thing demand societi follow travel differ polici within food activ act commit visa fix fail border help stop close home back send problem return europ area put flee welcom sent franc complet keep forc know restor direct came conflict bomb pass major boat near power solv greater other thing proper manag surround resolv guard mean given poor defend great sever block closer french militari avoid outsid solut see real arab sinc still best room past isi kill war origin peac live improv yes germani make support situat leav deport caus condit escap creat fight end state also secur educ mani life east arm find well elimin must integr noth immigr work someth possibl cross finland stick flow well neighbour denmark european realli famili agreement case background children person region part time taken opportun arriv women real anyth seem order applic social way crimin state find abl union train soon futur best rest level big solut

17 So what do people say? Proportion of topics Topic 3: Tougher domestic laws Topic 5: Stronger borders Topic 2: Accept refugees Topic 6: Tackle war Topic 4: Remove incentives to migrate Topic 7: EU solution Topic 1: Development Expected Topic Proportions

18 Proportion of topics by country Topic 1: Development Topic 2: Accept refugees Topic 3: Tougher domestic laws Topic 4: Remove incentives to migrate Denmark Denmark Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Finland Finland France France France France Germany Germany Germany Germany UK UK UK UK Norway Norway Norway Norway Sweden Sweden Sweden Sweden Topic 5: Stronger borders Topic 6: Tackle war Topic 7: Regional solution Denmark Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Finland France France France Germany Germany Germany UK UK UK Norway Norway Norway Sweden Sweden Sweden

19 Correlations between topics People who talk about development also talk about the importance of stronger borders Regional solution Tackle war People who argue we should accept refugees, tend not to talk about development (it s negatively correlated with development) Stronger borders Remove incentives to migrate Tougher domestic laws Accept refugees Pearson Correlation When thinking about refugees and immigration it is apparent that development is framed in a negative or defensive way, i.e. about keeping people there Development 1 Development 0.55 Accept refugees 0.7 Tougher domestic laws 0.59 Remove incentives to migrate 0.79 Stronger borders 0.82 Tackle war 0.45 Regional solution Comms insights: We should be very cautious about linking development and migration There is a real risk of activating exclusionary frames

20 The four countries have a different set of concerns FR unemployment is the most important problem, followed by terrorism/isis DE the Syrian refugee crisis in Europe, terrorism and ISIS are Germans top issues UK membership in the EU and immigration dominate US a more diverse set of concerns, but the economy, inequality and ISIS are key issues Comms insights: the space to communicate is tight need to acknowledge wider, serious & emotional concerns

21 Attitudes towards refugees For the past two waves we ve been tracking public attitudes towards the refugee crisis Across the four countries, and wave on wave, there is remarkable consistency in attitudes A majority see refugees as overwhelming public services (73% DE); entering the country posing as terrorists (78% DE); and threaten culture and traditions (53% GB) Few see refugees as strengthening the economy (21% DE) or improving the country s standing in the world (26% DE) Most support is seen for statement that there is a moral obligation to let refugees come and live in country (32% DE)

22

23 Which, if any, of the following words describe your feelings about the number of immigrants coming to [country]?

24 Which, if any, of the following words describe your feelings about the number of immigrants coming to [country]?

25 Is there space to talk about aid/poverty and migration/security and do we want to? A contradiction we don t yet understand People are concerned about migration and security and they appear to be advocating solutions to issues that keep migrants/issues over there rather than over here However, to date, we ve seen little evidence that national interest arguments resonate with the public as a justification for giving aid British YouGov survey (Aug 2016) found that a majority support (60%) giving aid based on need rather than trade deals We find more evidence for giving aid based on moral sentiments or kindness Is lack of evidence for aid in the national interest because we haven t communicated it properly and if we do, can we effectively manage the risks?

26 4. Key insights 1. AAT Data & design Key findings 2. SDGs Awareness Attainability & importance Can we move people? 3. Refugee crisis What do people say, think & feel Opportunity or risk? 6 things we know about building public support for development

27 6 key insights for communications 1. Positive drivers of (behavioural engagement) with global poverty Social norms Can make a difference as an individual Political efficacy Political interest As people become politically interested & motivated they become more engaged 2. Knowledge isn t the answer increasing knowledge levels doesn't increase support for aid Stay away from big numbers (millions and billions is a lot to anyone) Don t message on aid volumes tell stories of impact, effectiveness, returns

28 Key insights (cont.) 3. Don t avoid the elephant in the room corruption Talking about anti-corruption efforts reverses the negative impact of mentioning corruption in the first place, especially for sceptics Key message: Aid works despite corruption 4. Messengers Frontline workers (doctors/nurses) and volunteers work well for all audiences Businesspeople don t work at all (even for centre-right audiences); inspirational messengers (i.e. Malala) and philanthropists only work for engaged audiences Caring for others and relatability are the two most important traits for messengers to have

29 Key insights (cont.) 5. Charity begins at home Even with greater returns on spending overseas, people still prefer money to be spent at home But, if you tell people money is already being spent overseas, they are much less likely to want to spend it at home 6. Support is shallow and may be lower than previously thought Concern has not been and is not as high as we have thought Online methods as used in AAT show 20% fewer say they are concerned (vs. face-to-face format)

30 Following AAT research & insights Regular AAT Pulse newsletter 6 times a year AAT website in development The Aid Attitudes Tracker Pulse The Aid Attitudes Tracker (AAT) is a large (c. 8,000) sample longitudinal survey, that has been tracking the GB public s attitudes towards international aid and development issues twice a year since FOCUS Issue 13 July / 3 If you want access to either newsletter or website please Will Tucker will@willtuckerconsulting.com jennifer.hudson@ucl.ac.uk d.hudson@ucl.ac.uk Photo: DFID Flickr, Rachel Unkovic, International Rescue Committee S U M M A R Y High levels of concern about the impact of refugees in Britain In this Pulse we focus upon attitudes towards refugees and share some ideas for how organisations can engage the public with refugee and migration issues. There is widespread concern among the British public about the negative impact that refugees may have on their lives or to Britain more generally. Only a small percentage of the population recognise the positive contributions which refugees can make to the UK. The message that lands best with audiences is that we have a moral obligation to let refugees in. But this is still a minority view. Concern about the impact that refugees could have is not a fringe issue, nor is it exclusively held by those on the political right or opponents of aid. We must communicate with supporters and potential supporters by acknowledging these concerns. The group that do most consistently hold more favourable views towards the impact of refugees on the UK are young people (18 24s). In Wave 5, we probed respondents on seven key questions. There is a widely shared belief that refugees from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya will have a negative impact on the UK: 71% believe that allowing large numbers of refugees to come to Britain threatens to overwhelm public services. 56% believe that allowing large numbers of refugees to come to Britain threatens British culture. 72% believe that there is a real danger that terrorists will enter Britain posing as refugees. Fewer people agree that allowing refugees from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya into Britain will benefit the country: 18% believe that allowing refugees in will help strengthen the economy. 17% believe that allowing refugees in will improve the UK s standing in the world. 25% believe that overseas aid for humanitarian emergencies helps to reduce immigration to Britain.

31 Appendix

32 Aid Attitudes Tracker Methodology The Aid Attitudes Tracker ( ) is a nationally-representative survey conducted online, twice-annually in the US, UK, France and Germany funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Fieldwork is provided by YouGov. Final data are then statistically weighted to the national profile of all adults aged 18+ (including people without internet access), age, gender, social class, region, level of education, how respondents voted at the previous election and level of political interest Sample sizes across the waves average about 6,000-8,000 which enables us to drill down in more detail into certain demographics without losing too much to margin of error The survey is designed by academics at University College London and University of Texas, Dallas. The data here are analyzed by UCL

33 UK Aid Attitude Tracker Actions Read article Discussed article Shared article Interacted community Written blog Used voice % of people reporting having done the action in the past 12 months 60% 40% 20% 0% 60% 40% 20% 0% 60% 40% 20% 0% 66% 57% 61% 58% 59% 54% 56% 17% 15% 15% 13% 14% 14% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 45% 50% 47% 48% 43% 36% 30% 29% 28% 23% 22% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 20% 17% 16% 14% 16% 15% 13% 11% 10% 9% 9% 9% 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 8% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 9% 7% 8% 7% 8% 7% 21% 20% 18% 17% 18% 17% Shared opinions Donated money Fundraised money Volunteered domestic Volunteered abroad Purchased boycotted 22% 19% 19% 18% 16% 17% Voted Setup community Setup organisation Contacted MP offline Contacted MP online Participated march 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016) 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016) 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016) Wave 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016) 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016) 1 (Nov 2013) 2 (June 2014) 3 (Dec 2014) 4 (May 2015) 5 (Nov 2015) 6 (Jun 2016)

34 Refugee battery Question wording Allowing large numbers of refugees to come to Britain threatens to overwhelm our public services. Allowing refugees to come to Britain is a good way to strengthen the British economy. Allowing a large number of refugees from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya to live in Britain threatens British culture and traditions. Allowing refugees from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya to come and live in Britain will improve Britain's standing in the world. Britain has a moral obligation to let refugees from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya come and live here. There is a real danger that terrorists from countries like Syria, Iraq and Libya will enter Britain posing as refugees. Overseas aid for humanitarian emergencies in countries in the Middle East and Africa helps to reduce attempts to immigrate to the UK.

35 Information, progress, and valence Valence Negative Positive Progress Failure Success despite these efforts the MDG target on reducing maternal mortality has not been met even though the MDG target to halve extreme poverty has successfully been met, 1 billion people still live in extreme poverty the MDG target on reducing maternal mortality has not been met. Even so, because of these efforts, the number of maternal deaths has been cut in half the MDG target to halve extreme poverty has successfully been met. The proportion of people living in extreme poverty has fallen from around 50% to 14%