2020年2月25日香港民意研究所發佈會 – 傳媒參考資料
發佈會回顧
2020年2月25日 新聞公報
民研計劃發放特首和特區政府民望、各項信任及信心指標及民情指數
特別宣佈
- 香港民意研究計劃（香港民研）前身為香港大學民意研究計劃（港大民研）。公報內的「民研計劃」指的可以是香港民研或其前身港大民研。
- 香港民研今日發放的各項信任及信心指標，部分數字是本年7月1日前發放的最後一次，未來會否繼續，要視乎公眾是否支持。
公報簡要
民研計劃於二月中由真實訪問員以隨機抽樣電話訪問方式成功訪問了1,008名香港居民。調查顯示，特首林鄭月娥的最新評分為18.2分，民望淨值為負74個百分點，較兩星期前顯著下跌6個百分點，全部民望數字再創其上任以來最差紀錄。特區政府的最新滿意率淨值同為負74個百分點，信任淨值為負62個百分點，與上個月比較均大幅轉差，並分別創1997年和1992年有紀錄以來最低點。市民對現時經濟、民生及政治狀況的滿意淨值分別為負64、負69及負83個百分點，對現時經濟狀況的滿意淨值創2003年以來新低，而對現時民生狀況的滿意淨值則創1992年有紀錄以來新低，對兩者的評價均較上個月大幅轉差。政府信任程度方面，香港特區政府、北京中央政府及台灣政府的信任淨值分別為負62、負43及正10個百分點，前兩者的信任淨值均創1992年有紀錄以來新低，而台灣政府的信任淨值則較半年前大幅上升，並創1996年以來新高。信心指標方面，對中國前途的信心淨值為負13個百分點，創1997年有紀錄以來新低。另一方面，對香港前途和一國兩制的信心淨值較半年前大幅下跌至負44和負41個百分點，分別創1994和1993年有紀錄以來新低。民情指數方面，最新數字為38.5，較二月上旬大跌13.4點，同樣創下1992年有紀錄以來新低。調查的實效回應比率為64.6%。在95%置信水平下，調查的百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，淨值誤差不超過+/-8%，評分誤差不超過+/-1.8。
樣本資料
| 調查日期 | ： | 17-19/2/2020 |
| 調查方法 | ： | 由真實訪問員進行隨機抽樣電話訪問 |
| 訪問對象 | ： | 18歲或以上操粵語的香港居民 |
| 成功樣本數目[1] | ： | 1,008 (包括504個固網及504個手機樣本) |
| 實效回應比率[2] | ： | 64.6% |
| 抽樣誤差[3] | ： | 在95%置信水平下，百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，淨值誤差不超過+/-8%，評分誤差不超過+/-1.8 |
| 加權方法 | ： | 按照政府統計處提供的統計數字以「反覆多重加權法」作出調整。全港人口年齡及性別分佈統計數字來自《二零一八年年中人口數字》，而教育程度（最高就讀程度）及經濟活動身分統計數字則來自《香港的女性及男性 - 主要統計數字》（2018年版）。 |
[1] 數字為調查的總樣本數目，個別題目則可能只涉及次樣本。有關數字請參閱下列數表內列出的樣本數目。
[2] 民研計劃在2017年9月前以「整體回應比率」彙報樣本資料，2017年9月開始則以「實效回應比率」彙報。2018年7月，民研計劃再調整實效回應比率的計算方法，因此改變前後的回應比率不能直接比較。
[3] 此公報中所有誤差數字均以95%置信水平計算。95%置信水平，是指倘若以不同隨機樣本重複進行有關調查100次，則95次各自計算出的誤差範圍會包含人口真實數字。由於調查數字涉及抽樣誤差，傳媒引用百分比數字時，應避免使用小數點，在引用評分數字時，則可以使用一個小數點。
特首及特區政府民望
以下是特首林鄭月娥的最新民望數字：
| 調查日期 | 28/11-3/12/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 3-8/1/20 | 16-21/1/20 | 3-6/2/20 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 1,014 | 1,046 | 1,011 | 1,004 | 1,001 | 1,008 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 63.2% | 61.6% | 72.0% | 69.7% | 77.6% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及 誤差 |
-- |
| 特首林鄭月娥評分 | 19.7 | 19.6 | 21.5 | 20.8 | 20.3 | 18.2+/-1.8 | -2.0 |
| 林鄭月娥出任特首支持率 | 10% | 12% | 14% | 14% | 13% | 9+/-2% | -4%[4] |
| 林鄭月娥出任特首反對率 | 82% | 81% | 80% | 80% | 81% | 83+/-2% | +2% |
| 支持率淨值 | -72% | -68% | -66% | -66% | -68% | -74+/-4% | -6%[4] |
[4] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
以下是特區政府的最新民望數字：
| 調查日期 | 16-19/9/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 688 | 668 | 591 | 646 | 597 | 620 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 69.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及 誤差 |
-- |
| 特區政府表現滿意率[5] | 12% | 10% | 11% | 14% | 15% | 9+/-2% | -6%[6] |
| 特區政府表現不滿率[5] | 76% | 79% | 77% | 76% | 75% | 83+/-3% | +7%[6] |
| 滿意率淨值 | -63% | -69% | -66% | -62% | -60% | -74+/-5% | -14%[6] |
| 平均量值[5] | 1.8 | 1.7[6] | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.6+/-0.1 | -0.2[6] |
[5] 數字採自五等量尺。平均量值是把答案按照正面程度，以1分最低5分最高量化成為1、2、3、4、5分，再求取樣本平均數值。
[6] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
以下是市民對特區政府信任程度的最新結果：
| 調查日期 | 15-20/8/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 632 | 623 | 607 | 618 | 641 | 616 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 68.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及 誤差 |
-- |
| 信任特區政府比率[7] | 27% | 23% | 23% | 25% | 19%[8] | 14+/-3% | -5%[8] |
| 不信任特區政府比率[7] | 64% | 68% | 64% | 63% | 69%[8] | 76+/-3% | +7%[8] |
| 信任淨值 | -37% | -44% | -41% | -39% | -50%[8] | -62+/-6% | -12%[8] |
| 平均量值[7] | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0[8] | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.2[8] |
[7] 數字採自五等量尺。平均量值是把答案按照正面程度，以1分最低5分最高量化成為1、2、3、4、5分，再求取樣本平均數值。
[8] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
以下是市民對社會狀況的最新評價：
| 調查日期 | 16-19/9/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 1,061 | 1,038 | 1,008 | 1,046 | 866 | 1,008 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 69.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及 誤差 |
-- |
| 現時經濟狀況滿意率[9] | 19%[10] | 19% | 20% | 17% | 16% | 9+/-2% | -7%[10] |
| 現時經濟狀況不滿率[9] | 55% | 61%[10] | 57%[10] | 57% | 63%[10] | 73+/-3% | +10%[10] |
| 滿意率淨值 | -35% | -42%[10] | -37% | -40% | -47%[10] | -64+/-4% | -17%[10] |
| 平均量值[9] | 2.4[10] | 2.3 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.2[10] | 1.9+/-0.1 | -0.3[10] |
| 現時民生狀況滿意率[9] | 13% | 14% | 17% | 14% | 17% | 9+/-2% | -7%[10] |
| 現時民生狀況不滿率[9] | 70% | 71% | 69% | 68% | 68% | 79+/-3% | +11%[10] |
| 滿意率淨值 | -57% | -57% | -52% | -53% | -52% | -69+/-4% | -18%[10] |
| 平均量值[9] | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.1[10] | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.3[10] |
| 現時政治狀況滿意率[9] | 3%[10] | 3% | 4% | 3% | 6%[10] | 3+/-1% | -3%[10] |
| 現時政治狀況不滿率[9] | 85% | 88% | 83%[10] | 88%[10] | 85% | 86+/-2% | +1% |
| 滿意率淨值 | -82% | -85% | -79%[10] | -84%[10] | -79%[10] | -83+/-3% | -4% |
| 平均量值[9] | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.5[10] | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.4+/-0.1 | -- |
[9] 數字採自五等量尺。平均量值是把答案按照正面程度，以1分最低5分最高量化成為1、2、3、4、5分，再求取樣本平均數值。
[10] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
最新調查顯示，特首林鄭月娥的評分為18.2分，其支持率為9%，反對率為83%，民望淨值為負74個百分點，較兩星期前顯著下跌6個百分點，全部民望數字再創其上任以來最差紀錄。
特區政府方面，最新滿意率為9%，不滿率為83%，滿意率淨值為負74個百分點，平均量值為1.6分，即整體上介乎「幾不滿」及「好不滿」之間。信任程度方面，最新的信任比率為14%，不信任比率為76%，信任淨值為負62個百分點，平均量值為1.8分，即整體上接近「幾不信任」。以上民望數字均較上個月大幅轉差，並分別創1997年和1992年有紀錄以來最差。
至於市民對現時經濟、民生及政治狀況的滿意程度，最新滿意率分別為9%、9%及3%，而滿意淨值就分別為負64、負69及負83個百分點。經濟狀況和民生狀況的平均量值分別為1.9及1.8，即整體上接近「幾不滿」；政治狀況的平均量值為1.4，即整體上介乎「幾不滿」及「好不滿」之間。市民對現時經濟狀況的滿意淨值創2003年以來新低，而對現時民生狀況的滿意淨值則創1992年有紀錄以來新低，對兩者的評價均較上個月大幅轉差。
信任及信心指標
市民對特區、北京中央及台灣政府的信任程度、對中港前途以及一國兩制的信心的最新結果表列如下：
| 調查日期 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 623 | 607 | 618 | 641 | 616 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| (重複顯示) | ||||||
| 信任特區政府比率[11] | 23% | 23% | 25% | 19%[12] | 14+/-3% | -5%[12] |
| 不信任特區政府比率[11] | 68% | 64% | 63% | 69%[12] | 76+/-3% | +7%[12] |
| 信任淨值 | -44% | -41% | -39% | -50%[12] | -62+/-6% | -12%[12] |
| 平均量值[11] | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0[12] | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.2[12] |
| 調查日期 | 21-25/5/18 | 3-6/9/18 | 28/2-5/3/19 | 15-20/8/19 | 17-19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 513-555 | 515-538 | 613-674 | 603-633 | 575-612 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 55.9% | 50.4% | 72.2% | 68.5% | 64.6% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 信任中央政府比率[11] | 34% | 40%[12] [13] | 33%[12] | 23%[12] | 20+/-3% | -3% |
| 不信任中央政府比率[11] | 48% | 40%[12] | 48%[12] | 63%[12] | 63+/-4% | -- |
| 信任淨值 | -14% | 0%[12] | -15%[12] | -40%[12] | -43+/-7% | -3% |
| 平均量值[11] | 2.7 | 2.9[12] | 2.7[12] | 2.2[12] | 2.1+/-0.1 | -0.1 |
| 信任台灣政府比率[11] | 17% | 22% | 23% | 25% | 38+/-4% | +13%[12] |
| 不信任台灣政府比率[11] | 50%[12] | 45% | 40% | 37% | 28+/-4% | -10%[12] |
| 信任淨值 | -33%[12] | -23%[12] [13] | -17% | -12% | 10+/-7% | +23%[12] |
| 平均量值[11] | 2.4 | 2.5[12] [13] | 2.6 | 2.7 | 3.1+/-0.1 | +0.4[12] |
| 對香港前途有信心比率 | 46%[12] | 46% | 39%[12] | 40% | 26+/-4% | -14%[12] |
| 對香港前途沒有信心比率 | 48%[12] | 47% | 55%[12] | 52% | 70+/-4% | +18%[12] |
| 信心淨值 | -2%[12] | -1% | -16%[12] | -12% | -44+/-7% | -32%[12] |
| 對中國前途有信心比率 | 61%[12] | 62% | 62% | 42%[12] | 39+/-4% | -3% |
| 對中國前途沒有信心比率 | 31%[12] | 31% | 32% | 50%[12] | 52+/-4% | +2% |
| 信心淨值 | 30%[12] | 30% | 30% | -8%[12] | -13+/-8% | -5% |
| 對一國兩制有信心比率 | 40%[12] | 45% | 41% | 34%[12] | 27+/-4% | -7%[12] |
| 對一國兩制沒有信心比率 | 54%[12] | 49% | 55%[12] | 62%[12] | 68+/-4% | +6%[12] |
| 信心淨值 | -14%[12] | -4% | -14% | -28%[12] | -41+/-7% | -13%[12] |
[11] 數字採自五等量尺。平均量值是把答案按照正面程度，以1分最低5分最高量化成為1、2、3、4、5分，再求取樣本平均數值。
[12] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
[13] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，是由於加權方法改變。如果以舊有加權方法處理數據，則差異並未超過抽樣誤差。
政府信任程度方面，14%被訪市民表示信任香港特區政府，信任北京中央政府及台灣政府的，佔20%及38%，三項信任淨值分別為負62、負43及正10個百分點，平均量值就分別為1.8、2.1及3.1分，前兩者整體上接近「幾不信任」，後者則整體上接近「一半半」。香港特區政府和北京中央政府的信任淨值均創1992年有紀錄以來新低，而台灣政府的信任淨值則較半年前大幅上升，並創1996年以來新高。
信心指標方面，39%表示對中國前途有信心，淨值為負13個百分點，創1997年有紀錄以來新低。另一方面，分別有26%和27%市民表示對香港前途和一國兩制有信心，淨值較半年前大幅下跌至負44和負41個百分點，分別創1994和1993年有紀錄以來新低。
民情指數
民研計劃制定「民情指數」（PSI），目的在於量化香港市民對香港社會的情緒反應，以解釋及預視社會出現集體行動的可能性。民情指數包涵了「政通」和「人和」兩個概念，分別以「政評數值（GA）」和「社評數值（SA）」顯示。「政評數值（GA）」泛指市民對整體政府管治的表現評價，而「社評數值（SA）」則泛指市民對整體社會狀況的評價，分別由四及六項民意數字組合而成。指數本身及兩項數值均以0至200顯示，100代表正常。
以下為民情指數、政評數值及社評數值走勢圖：
 |
|||
| 最新數值 | 民情指數：38.5 (-13.4) | 政評數值：42.1 (-8.5) | 社評數值：40.5 (-15.6) |
以下是民情指數、政評數值、社評數值，及十項基礎民意數字的近期數值：
| 截數日期 | 3/12/19 | 18/12/19 | 8/1/20 | 21/1/20 | 6/2/20 | 19/2/20 | 最新變化 |
| 民情指數 | 54.2 | 54.3 | 55.0 | 52.2 | 51.9 | 38.5 | -13.4 |
| 政評數值 | 51.0 | 52.3 | 53.5 | 51.0 | 50.6 | 42.1 | -8.5 |
| 特首評分 | 19.7 | 19.6 | 21.5 | 20.8 | 20.3 | 18.2 | -2.0 |
| 特首民望淨值 | -72% | -68% | -66% | -66% | -68% | -74% | -6% |
| 政府滿意程度平均量值 | 1.7[14] | 1.8 | 1.8[14] | 1.8 | 1.8[14] | 1.6 | -0.2 |
| 政府信任程度平均量值 | 2.2[14] | 2.2 | 2.2[14] | 2.0 | 2.0[14] | 1.8 | -0.2 |
| 社評數值 | 59.7[14] | 58.6 | 58.6[14] | 56.1 | 56.1[14] | 40.5 | -15.6 |
| 政治狀況滿意程度 | 1.5[14] | 1.4 | 1.4[14] | 1.5 | 1.5[14] | 1.4 | -- |
| 政治狀況成份指標權數 | 0.32[14] | 0.34 | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | -- |
| 經濟狀況滿意程度 | 2.3[14] | 2.4 | 2.4[14] | 2.2 | 2.2[14] | 1.9 | -0.3 |
| 經濟狀況成份指標權數 | 0.34[14] | 0.32 | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | -- |
| 民生狀況滿意程度 | 2.1[14] | 2.1 | 2.1[14] | 2.1 | 2.1[14] | 1.8 | -0.3 |
| 民生狀況成份指標權數 | 0.35[14] | 0.34 | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | -- |
[14] 當有關數字沒有更新時，民研計劃會採用最近一次已公佈的數字替代。
各項指數的具體數值，可按下表理解：
| 指數得分 | 百分位數 | 指數得分 | 百分位數 |
| 140-200 | 最高1% | 0-60 | 最低1% |
| 125 | 最高5% | 75 | 最低5% |
| 120 | 最高10% | 80 | 最低10% |
| 110 | 最高25% | 90 | 最低25% |
| 100為正常數值，即半數在上，半數在下 | |||
民情指數較二月上旬大跌13.4點至38.5，數字可以視為過去逾二十年來最差的1個百分比。民情指數的兩個成份數值中，反映市民對整體政府管治表現評價的政評數值大跌8.5點至42.1，而反映市民對整體社會狀況評價的社評數值亦大跌15.6點至40.5。兩者均可以視為過去逾二十年來最差的1個百分比。民情指數、政評數值和社評數值均創1992年有紀錄以來新低。
民意日誌
民研計劃於2007年開始與慧科訊業有限公司合作，由慧科訊業按照民研計劃設計的分析方法，將每日大事紀錄傳送至民研計劃，經民研計劃核實後成為「民意日誌」。
由於本新聞公報所涉及的部分調查項目，上次調查日期為15-20/8/2019，而今次調查日期則為17-19/2/2020，因此是次公報中的「民意日誌」項目便以上述日期為依歸，讓讀者作出比較。以涵蓋率不下25%本地報章每日頭條新聞和報社評論計，在上述期間發生的相關大事包括以下事件，讀者可以自行判斷有關事件有否影響各項民調數字：
| 19/2/20 | 鑽石公主號郵輪首批港人乘坐包機回港 |
| 14/2/20 | 政府宣布成立防疫抗疫基金涉及250億元 |
| 13/2/20 | 夏寶龍被委任為港澳辦主任 |
| 11/2/20 | 青衣長康邨康美樓居民因武漢肺炎個案緊急疏散 |
| 9/2/20 | 香港現首宗武漢肺炎家族感染個案 |
| 7/2/20 | 經中國大陸來港人士需隔離14日措施生效 |
| 6/2/20 | 市民搶購生活必需品 |
| 4/2/20 | 香港現首宗武漢肺炎死亡個案 |
| 3/2/20 | 政府宣布進一步關閉關口 |
| 2/2/20 | 醫管局員工陣線罷工明日開始 |
| 31/1/20 | 政府拒絕全面封關 |
| 29/1/20 | 口罩供應短缺並出現搶購潮 |
| 28/1/20 | 政府宣布局部封關 |
| 27/1/20 | 政府限制湖北居民及曾赴湖北者入境 |
| 23/1/20 | 武漢宣布封城 |
| 22/1/20 | 香港現兩宗「高度懷疑」武漢肺炎個案 |
| 19/1/20 | 中環集會演變成警民衝突 |
| 16/1/20 | 中美簽署首輪經貿協議 |
| 14/1/20 | 政府推出十項民生政策 |
| 13/1/20 | 政府擬向海洋公園提供過百億資助 |
| 11/1/20 | 蔡英文勝出台灣總統選舉 |
| 4/1/20 | 駱惠寧被委任為中聯辦主任 |
| 1/1/20 | 民間人權陣線舉辦元旦大遊行 |
| 28/11/19 | 美國總統特朗普簽署《香港人權與民主法案》 |
數據分析
調查顯示，特首林鄭月娥的最新評分為18.2分，民望淨值為負74個百分點，較兩星期前顯著下跌6個百分點，全部民望數字再創其上任以來最差紀錄。特區政府的最新滿意率淨值同為負74個百分點，信任淨值為負62個百分點，與上個月比較均大幅轉差，並分別創1997年和1992年有紀錄以來最低點。
市民對現時經濟、民生及政治狀況的滿意淨值分別為負64、負69及負83個百分點，對現時經濟狀況的滿意淨值創2003年以來新低，而對現時民生狀況的滿意淨值則創1992年有紀錄以來新低，對兩者的評價均較上個月大幅轉差。
政府信任程度方面，香港特區政府、北京中央政府及台灣政府的信任淨值分別為負62、負43及正10個百分點，前兩者的信任淨值均創1992年有紀錄以來新低，而台灣政府的信任淨值則較半年前大幅上升，並創1996年以來新高。
信心指標方面，對中國前途的信心淨值為負13個百分點，創1997年有紀錄以來新低。另一方面，對香港前途和一國兩制的信心淨值較半年前大幅下跌至負44和負41個百分點，分別創1994和1993年有紀錄以來新低。
民情指數方面，最新數字為38.5，較二月上旬大跌13.4點，同樣創下1992年有紀錄以來新低。
Feb 25, 2020
Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute Press Conference – Press Materials
Press Conference Live
Press Release on February 25, 2020
POP releases popularity of CE and SAR Government,
trust and confidence indicators and Public Sentiment Index
Special Announcements
- The predecessor of Hong Kong Public Opinion Program (HKPOP) was The Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP). “POP” in this release can refer to HKPOP or its predecessor HKUPOP.
- Part of the POP survey on trust and confidence indicators is its last before July 1, 2020, whether it will be continued or not will depend on public support.
Abstract
POP successfully interviewed 1,008 Hong Kong residents by random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers in mid-February. Our survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 18.2 marks. Her net popularity is negative 74 percentage points, registering a significant drop of 6 percentage points compared to two weeks ago. All popularity figures are again at their worst since she became CE. The latest net satisfaction of the HKSAR Government also stands at negative 74 percentage points while the net trust value is negative 62 percentage points. Both figures have worsened dramatically compared to last month and are at their worst since records began in 1997 and 1992 respectively. People’s net satisfaction rates with the current economic, livelihood and political conditions are negative 64, negative 69 and negative 83 percentage points respectively. People’s net satisfaction with the current economic condition has registered a new record low since 2003, while that of the current livelihood condition has registered an all-time low since records began in 1992. Both figures have worsened dramatically over the month past. Regarding people’s trust in governments, the net trust in the HKSAR Government, the Beijing Central Government and the Taiwan Government are negative 62, negative 43 and positive 10 percentage points respectively. The former two have registered new lows since records began in 1992, while net trust in the Taiwan Government has increased significantly compared to half a year ago and registered new high since 1996. As for the confidence indicators, net confidence in the future of China stands at negative 13 percentage points, registering a new low since records began in 1997. On the other hand, net confidence in the future of Hong Kong and in “one country, two systems” have both dropped dramatically compared to half a year ago to negative 44 and negative 41 percentage points, registering new lows since records began in 1994 and 1993 respectively. As for the PSI, the latest figure is 38.5, significantly down by 13.4 points from early February, also a new low since records began in 1992. The effective response rate of the survey is 64.6%. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4%, that of net values is +/-8% and that of ratings is +/-1.8 at 95% confidence level.
Contact Information
| Date of survey | : | 17-19/2/2020 |
| Survey method | : | Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size[1] | : | 1,008 (including 504 landline and 504 mobile samples) |
| Effective response rate[2] | : | 64.6% |
| Sampling error[3] | : | Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, that of net values not more than +/-8% and that of ratings not more than +/-1.8 at 95% conf. level |
| Weighting method | : | Rim-weighted according to figures provided by the Census and Statistics Department. The gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population came from “Mid-year population for 2018”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2018 Edition)”. |
[1] This figure is the total sample size of the survey. Some questions may only involve a subsample, the size of which can be found in the tables below.
[2] Before September 2017, “overall response rate” was used to report surveys’ contact information. Starting from September 2017, “effective response rate” was used. In July 2018, POP further revised the calculation of effective response rate. Thus, the response rates before and after the change cannot be directly compared.
[3] All error figures in this release are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times with different random samples, we would expect 95 times having the population parameter within the respective error margins calculated. Because of sampling errors, when quoting percentages, journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, whereas one decimal place can be used when quoting rating figures.
Popularity of CE and SAR Government
Recent popularity figures of CE Carrie Lam are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 28/11-3/12/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 3-8/1/20 | 16-21/1/20 | 3-6/2/20 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 1,014 | 1,046 | 1,011 | 1,004 | 1,001 | 1,008 | -- |
| Response rate | 63.2% | 61.6% | 72.0% | 69.7% | 77.6% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Rating of CE Carrie Lam | 19.7 | 19.6 | 21.5 | 20.8 | 20.3 | 18.2+/-1.8 | -2.0 |
| Vote of confidence in CE Carrie Lam |
10% | 12% | 14% | 14% | 13% | 9+/-2% | -4%[4] |
| Vote of no confidence in CE Carrie Lam |
82% | 81% | 80% | 80% | 81% | 83+/-2% | +2% |
| Net approval rate | -72% | -68% | -66% | -66% | -68% | -74+/-4% | -6%[4] |
[4] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
Recent popularity figures of the HKSAR Government are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 16-19/9/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 688 | 668 | 591 | 646 | 597 | 620 | -- |
| Response rate | 69.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Satisfaction rate of SARG performance[5] | 12% | 10% | 11% | 14% | 15% | 9+/-2% | -6%[6] |
| Dissatisfaction rate of SARG performance[5] | 76% | 79% | 77% | 76% | 75% | 83+/-3% | +7%[6] |
| Net satisfaction rate | -63% | -69% | -66% | -62% | -60% | -74+/-5% | -14%[6] |
| Mean value[5] | 1.8 | 1.7[6] | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.6+/-0.1 | -0.2[6] |
[5] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[6] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
Recent figures regarding people’s trust in the HKSAR Government are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 15-20/8/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 632 | 623 | 607 | 618 | 641 | 616 | -- |
| Response rate | 68.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Trust in HKSAR Government[7] | 27% | 23% | 23% | 25% | 19%[8] | 14+/-3% | -5%[8] |
| Distrust in HKSAR Government[7] | 64% | 68% | 64% | 63% | 69%[8] | 76+/-3% | +7%[8] |
| Net trust | -37% | -44% | -41% | -39% | -50%[8] | -62+/-6% | -12%[8] |
| Mean value[7] | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0[8] | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.2[8] |
[7] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[8] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
People’s recent appraisals of society’s conditions are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 16-19/9/19 | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 1,061 | 1,038 | 1,008 | 1,046 | 866 | 1,008 | -- |
| Response rate | 69.5% | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Current economic condition: Satisfaction rate[9] |
19%[10] | 19% | 20% | 17% | 16% | 9+/-2% | -7%[10] |
| Current economic condition: Dissatisfaction rate[9] |
55% | 61%[10] | 57%[10] | 57% | 63%[10] | 73+/-3% | +10%[10] |
| Net satisfaction rate | -35% | -42%[10] | -37% | -40% | -47%[10] | -64+/-4% | -17%[10] |
| Mean value[9] | 2.4[10] | 2.3 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.2[10] | 1.9+/-0.1 | -0.3[10] |
| Current livelihood condition: Satisfaction rate[9] |
13% | 14% | 17% | 14% | 17% | 9+/-2% | -7%[10] |
| Current livelihood condition: Dissatisfaction rate[9] |
70% | 71% | 69% | 68% | 68% | 79+/-3% | +11%[10] |
| Net satisfaction rate | -57% | -57% | -52% | -53% | -52% | -69+/-4% | -18%[10] |
| Mean value[9] | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.1[10] | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.3[10] |
| Current political condition: Satisfaction rate[9] |
3%[10] | 3% | 4% | 3% | 6%[10] | 3+/-1% | -3%[10] |
| Current political condition: Dissatisfaction rate[9] |
85% | 88% | 83%[10] | 88%[10] | 85% | 86+/-2% | +1% |
| Net satisfaction rate | -82% | -85% | -79%[10] | -84%[10] | -79%[10] | -83+/-3% | -4% |
| Mean value[9] | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.5[10] | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.4+/-0.1 | -- |
[9] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[10] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
Our latest survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 18.2 marks. Her approval rate is 9%, disapproval rate 83%, giving a net popularity of negative 74 percentage points, registering a significant drop of 6 percentage points compared to two weeks ago. All popularity figures are again at their worst since she became CE.
Regarding the HKSAR Government, the latest satisfaction rate is 9%, whereas 83% were dissatisfied, thus net satisfaction stands at negative 74 percentage points. The mean score is 1.6, meaning between “quite dissatisfied” and “very dissatisfied” in general. Regarding people’s trust in the HKSAR Government, 14% of the respondents expressed trust, 76% expressed distrust. The net trust value is negative 62 percentage points. The mean score is 1.8, meaning close to “quite distrust” in general. All of these figures have worsened dramatically compared to last month and are at their worst since records began in 1997 and 1992 respectively.
As for people’s satisfaction with the current economic, livelihood and political conditions, the latest satisfaction rates are 9%, 9% and 3% respectively, while the net satisfaction rates are negative 64, negative 69 and negative 83 percentage points respectively. The mean scores of economic condition and livelihood condition are 1.9 and 1.8 respectively, meaning close to “quite dissatisfied” in general; that of political condition is 1.4, meaning between “quite dissatisfied” and “very dissatisfied” in general. People’s net satisfaction with the current economic condition has registered a new record low since 2003, while that of the current livelihood condition has registered a new low since records began in 1992. People’s feelings toward both of them have worsened dramatically compared to last month.
Trust and Confidence Indicators
Recent popularity figures of SAR, Beijing Central and Taiwan Governments and people’s confidence in the future as well as “one country, two systems” are summarized below:
| Date of survey | 17-23/10/19 | 15-21/11/19 | 13-18/12/19 | 16-21/1/20 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 623 | 607 | 618 | 641 | 616 | -- |
| Response rate | 63.2% | 74.1% | 61.6% | 69.7% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| (Repeated listing) | ||||||
| Trust in HKSAR Government[11] | 23% | 23% | 25% | 19%[12] | 14+/-3% | -5%[12] |
| Distrust in HKSAR Government[11] | 68% | 64% | 63% | 69%[12] | 76+/-3% | +7%[12] |
| Net trust | -44% | -41% | -39% | -50%[12] | -62+/-6% | -12%[12] |
| Mean value[11] | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0[12] | 1.8+/-0.1 | -0.2[12] |
| Date of survey | 21-25/5/18 | 3-6/9/18 | 28/2-5/3/19 | 15-20/8/19 | 17-19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 513-555 | 515-538 | 613-674 | 603-633 | 575-612 | -- |
| Response rate | 55.9% | 50.4% | 72.2% | 68.5% | 64.6% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Trust in Beijing Government[11] | 34% | 40%[12] [13] | 33%[12] | 23%[12] | 20+/-3% | -3% |
| Distrust in Beijing Government[11] | 48% | 40%[12] | 48%[12] | 63%[12] | 63+/-4% | -- |
| Net trust | -14% | 0%[12] | -15%[12] | -40%[12] | -43+/-7% | -3% |
| Mean value[11] | 2.7 | 2.9[12] | 2.7[12] | 2.2[12] | 2.1+/-0.1 | -0.1 |
| Trust in Taiwan Government[11] | 17% | 22% | 23% | 25% | 38+/-4% | +13%[12] |
| Distrust in Taiwan Government[11] | 50%[12] | 45% | 40% | 37% | 28+/-4% | -10%[12] |
| Net trust | -33%[12] | -23%[12] [13] | -17% | -12% | 10+/-7% | +23%[12] |
| Mean value[11] | 2.4 | 2.5[12] [13] | 2.6 | 2.7 | 3.1+/-0.1 | +0.4[12] |
| Confidence in HK’s future | 46%[12] | 46% | 39%[12] | 40% | 26+/-4% | -14%[12] |
| No-confidence in HK’s future | 48%[12] | 47% | 55%[12] | 52% | 70+/-4% | +18%[12] |
| Net confidence | -2%[12] | -1% | -16%[12] | -12% | -44+/-7% | -32%[12] |
| Confidence in China’s future | 61%[12] | 62% | 62% | 42%[12] | 39+/-4% | -3% |
| No-confidence in China’s future | 31%[12] | 31% | 32% | 50%[12] | 52+/-4% | +2% |
| Net confidence | 30%[12] | 30% | 30% | -8%[12] | -13+/-8% | -5% |
| Confidence in “one country, two systems” |
40%[12] | 45% | 41% | 34%[12] | 27+/-4% | -7%[12] |
| No-confidence in “one country, two systems” |
54%[12] | 49% | 55%[12] | 62%[12] | 68+/-4% | +6%[12] |
| Net confidence | -14%[12] | -4% | -14% | -28%[12] | -41+/-7% | -13%[12] |
[11] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[12] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
[13] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level because of a change in the weighting method. If the previous weighting method was used, the difference would not have gone beyond the sampling error.
Regarding people’s trust in governments, 14% of the respondents trust the HKSAR Government, 20% trust the Beijing Central Government, and 38% trust the Taiwan Government. The net trust values are negative 62, negative 43 and positive 10 percentage points, while the mean scores are 1.8, 2.1 and 3.1 respectively, with the former two meaning close to “quite distrust” in general and the latter meaning close to “half-half” in general. Net trust in the HKSAR Government and the Beijing Central Government have registered new lows since records began in 1992, while net trust in the Taiwan Government has increased dramatically compared to half a year ago and registered new high since 1996.
As for the confidence indicators, 39% expressed confidence in the future of China while net confidence stands at negative 13 percentage points, registering a new low since records began in 1997. On the other hand, 26% and 27% expressed confidence in the future of Hong Kong and in “one country, two systems” respectively, while net confidence dropped dramatically compared to half a year ago to negative 44 and negative 41 percentage points, registering new lows since records began in 1994 and 1993 respectively.
Public Sentiment Index
The Public Sentiment Index (PSI) compiled by POP aims at quantifying Hong Kong people’s sentiments, in order to explain and predict the likelihood of collective behaviour. PSI comprises 2 components: one being Government Appraisal (GA) Score and the other being Society Appraisal (SA) Score. GA refers to people’s appraisal of society’s governance while SA refers to people’s appraisal of the social environment. Both GA and SA scores are compiled from a respective of 4 and 6 opinion survey figures. All PSI, GA and SA scores range between 0 to 200, with 100 meaning normal.
The chart of PSI, GA and SA are shown below:
|
|||
| Latest figure | Public Sentiment Index (PSI): 38.5 (-13.4) |
Government Appraisal (GA): 42.1 (-8.5) |
Society Appraisal (SA): 40.5 (-15.6) |
Recent values of PSI, GA, SA and 10 fundamental figures are tabulated as follows:
| Cut-off date | 3/12/19 | 18/12/19 | 8/1/20 | 21/1/20 | 6/2/20 | 19/2/20 | Latest change |
| Public Sentiment Index (PSI) | 54.2 | 54.3 | 55.0 | 52.2 | 51.9 | 38.5 | -13.4 |
| Government Appraisal (GA) | 51.0 | 52.3 | 53.5 | 51.0 | 50.6 | 42.1 | -8.5 |
| Rating of CE | 19.7 | 19.6 | 21.5 | 20.8 | 20.3 | 18.2 | -2.0 |
| Net approval rate of CE | -72% | -68% | -66% | -66% | -68% | -74% | -6% |
| Mean value of people’s satisfaction with SARG | 1.7[14] | 1.8 | 1.8[14] | 1.8 | 1.8[14] | 1.6 | -0.2 |
| Mean value of people’s trust in SARG | 2.2[14] | 2.2 | 2.2[14] | 2.0 | 2.0[14] | 1.8 | -0.2 |
| Society Appraisal (SA) | 59.7[14] | 58.6 | 58.6[14] | 56.1 | 56.1[14] | 40.5 | -15.6 |
| People’s satisfaction with political condition | 1.5[14] | 1.4 | 1.4[14] | 1.5 | 1.5[14] | 1.4 | -- |
| Weighting index of political condition | 0.32[14] | 0.34 | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | -- |
| People’s satisfaction with economic condition | 2.3[14] | 2.4 | 2.4[14] | 2.2 | 2.2[14] | 1.9 | -0.3 |
| Weighting index of economic condition | 0.34[14] | 0.32 | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | 0.32[14] | -- |
| People’s satisfaction with livelihood condition | 2.1[14] | 2.1 | 2.1[14] | 2.1 | 2.1[14] | 1.8 | -0.3 |
| Weighting index of livelihood condition | 0.35[14] | 0.34 | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | 0.34[14] | -- |
[14] POP will adopt the latest published figures when there are no respective updates.
As for the meaning of the score values, please refer to the following:
| Score value | Percentile | Score value | Percentile |
| 140-200 | Highest 1% | 0-60 | Lowest 1% |
| 125 | Highest 5% | 75 | Lowest 5% |
| 120 | Highest 10% | 80 | Lowest 10% |
| 110 | Highest 25% | 90 | Lowest 25% |
| 100 being normal level, meaning half above half below | |||
The latest PSI stands at 38.5, down by 13.4 points from early February. It can be considered as among the worst 1% across the past 20 years or so. Among the two component scores of PSI, the Government Appraisal (GA) Score that reflects people’s appraisal of society’s governance plunges by 8.5 points to 42.1, whereas the Society Appraisal (SA) Score that reflects people’s appraisal of the social environment also plunges by 15.6 points to 40.5. They can both be considered as among the worst 1%. The PSI, GA and SA have all registered new lows since records began in 1992.
Opinion Daily
In 2007, POP started collaborating with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP a record of significant events of that day according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would then become “Opinion Daily” after they are verified by POP.
For some of the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey was conducted from 15 to 20 August, 2019 while this survey was conducted from 17 to 19 February, 2020. During this period, herewith the significant events selected from counting newspaper headlines and commentaries on a daily basis and covered by at least 25% of the local newspaper articles. Readers can make their own judgment if these significant events have any impacts to different polling figures.
| 19/2/20 | The first batch of Hong Kong people on the cruise Diamond Princess return to Hong Kong by a charter flight. |
| 14/2/20 | The government announces the setting up of the Anti-epidemic Fund. |
| 13/2/20 | Xia Baolong is appointed the Director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office. |
| 11/2/20 | Residents of Hong Mei House, Cheung Hong Estate in Tsing Yi evacuate due to Wuhan pneumonia cases. |
| 9/2/20 | First case of Wuhan pneumonia infection within family is reported in Hong Kong. |
| 7/2/20 | The policy of putting people entering Hong Kong from mainland China in a 14-day quarantine takes effect. |
| 6/2/20 | People rush to purchase daily necessities. |
| 4/2/20 | First death from Wuhan pneumonia is reported in Hong Kong. |
| 3/2/20 | The government announces further closure of borders. |
| 2/2/20 | Hospital Authority Employees Alliance members will go on strike starting tomorrow. |
| 31/1/20 | The government refuses full border closure. |
| 29/1/20 | People rush to purchase masks, which are in short supply. |
| 28/1/20 | The government announces partial border closure. |
| 27/1/20 | The government imposes immigration restrictions on Hubei residents and people who visited Hubei. |
| 23/1/20 | A lockdown of Wuhan is announced. |
| 22/1/20 | Two “highly suspected” Wuhan pneumonia cases are found in Hong Kong. |
| 19/1/20 | Rally at Central turns into a conflict between protestors and the police. |
| 16/1/20 | China and the US sign phase one of the trade deal. |
| 14/1/20 | The government announces ten initiatives to benefit livelihoods of the people. |
| 13/1/20 | The government plans to provide over $10 billion to Ocean Park as a subsidy. |
| 11/1/20 | Tsai Ing-wen wins Taiwan’s presidential election. |
| 4/1/20 | Luo Huining is appointed the Director of the Liaison Office. |
| 1/1/20 | The Civil Human Rights Front organizes the New Year Rally. |
| 28/11/19 | US President Donald Trump signs the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act. |
Data Analysis
Our survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 18.2 marks. Her net popularity is negative 74 percentage points, registering a significant drop of 6 percentage points compared to two weeks ago. All popularity figures are again at their worst since she became CE. The latest net satisfaction of the HKSAR Government also stands at negative 74 percentage points while the net trust value is negative 62 percentage points. Both figures have worsened dramatically compared to last month and are at their worst since records began in 1997 and 1992 respectively.
People’s net satisfaction rates with the current economic, livelihood and political conditions are negative 64, negative 69 and negative 83 percentage points respectively. People’s net satisfaction with the current economic condition has registered a new record low since 2003, while that of the current livelihood condition has registered an all-time low since records began in 1992. Both figures have worsened dramatically over the month past.
Regarding people’s trust in governments, the net trust in the HKSAR Government, the Beijing Central Government and the Taiwan Government are negative 62, negative 43 and positive 10 percentage points respectively. The former two have registered new lows since records began in 1992, while net trust in the Taiwan Government has increased significantly compared to half a year ago and registered new high since 1996.
As for the confidence indicators, net confidence in the future of China stands at negative 13 percentage points, registering a new low since records began in 1997. On the other hand, net confidence in the future of Hong Kong and in “one country, two systems” have both dropped dramatically compared to half a year ago to negative 44 and negative 41 percentage points, registering new lows since records began in 1994 and 1993 respectively.
As for the PSI, the latest figure is 38.5, significantly down by 13.4 points from early February, also a new low since records began in 1992.
