Survey findings on Hong Kong government’s popularity in September 2023
released by Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at CUHK
The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK)’s Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies conducted a telephone survey from 28 September to 9 November 2023 to study the popularity of the Hong Kong government. The major findings are:
Satisfaction with the Hong Kong government. In the recent survey, 25.2% of the 708 respondents expressed satisfaction with the Hong Kong government, 33.6% said they were dissatisfied and 39.7% answered “in-between”. The corresponding figures for July 2023 were 25.7%, 28.8% and 44.3% respectively. The statistical analysis (chi-square test) shows no statistically significant difference between the results for September 2023 and those for July 2023. When comparing the September 2023 figures (satisfied: 25.2%; dissatisfied: 33.6%) with those from September 2022 (satisfied: 22.7%; dissatisfied: 32.4%), the differences in percentage distribution were also not statistically significant.
Rating of Chief Executive John Lee. In the September 2023 survey, Chief Executive John Lee’s performance rating (on a point scale ranging from 0 to 100, with 50 as the pass mark) stood at 47.9 on average, lower than that in July 2023 (50.4), but the mean difference was not statistically significant. There was also no statistically significant difference between September 2023 (47.9) and September 2022 (46.5).
Ratings of three secretaries. The average performance ratings of the Chief Secretary for Administration (Eric Chan), Financial Secretary (Paul Chan) and Secretary for Justice (Paul Lam) in September 2023 were 44.0, 48.9 and 42.2 respectively. When comparing the September 2023 figures with those from July 2023 (Chief Secretary for Administration: 45.9; Financial Secretary: 52.0; Secretary for Justice: 44.5), a statistically significant difference was found for the Financial Secretary, while the differences in the average ratings of the other two secretaries were statistically insignificant. The ratings of the three secretaries in September 2023 were not statistical significantly different from the respective figures in September 2022 (Chief Secretary for Administration: 40.9; Financial Secretary: 47.6; Secretary for Justice: 43.4).
Trust in the Hong Kong government. In September 2023, 28.2% of the respondents said they trusted the Hong Kong government and 34.0% expressed distrust; 36.4% answered “in-between”. The corresponding figures for July 2023 were 28.2%, 23.8% and 46.0% respectively. A statistically significant difference was found between September 2023 and July 2023. Also, the percentage differences between September 2023 (trust: 28.2%; distrust: 34.0%) and September 2022 (trust: 25.0%; distrust: 27.1%) were statistically significant.
Trust in the Central Government. Regarding the level of trust in the Central Government in September 2023, 29.8% said they trusted it, 33.5% answered the opposite and 34.7% said “in-between”. The respective figures in July 2023 were 28.6%, 27.6% and 37.1%. A statistically significant difference was found between September 2023 and July 2023. Also, the difference between the percentage distribution in September 2023 (trust: 29.8%; distrust: 33.5%) and September 2022 (trust: 22.6%; distrust: 35.2%) was statistically significant.
In conclusion, the survey results in September 2023 indicate that the performance ratings of the Financial Secretary, the trust in the Hong Kong government and the trust in the Central Government were significantly different from those in July 2023 (significance test shows the differences were statistically significant). Also, levels of trust in the Hong Kong government and the Central Government in September 2023 were statistical significantly different from those in September 2022; while the public satisfaction level with the Hong Kong government’s performance, and the performance ratings of the Chief Executive and the three secretaries were not significantly different between September 2023 and September 2022 (significance test shows the differences were not statistically significant).
The survey employed a dual-frame sampling design that included both landline and mobile phone numbers. A total of 708 respondents aged 18 or above (landline: 366; mobile: 342) were successfully interviewed, with response rates of 39.7% (landline) and 44.4% (mobile). The sampling error for the sample size of 708 is estimated at plus or minus 3.68 percentage points at 95% confidence level. Furthermore, the data in this survey was weighted based on the probability of the respondents being selected via dual-frame sampling design and relevant age-sex distribution of the population published by the Census and Statistics Department before analysis.