2021年1月5日
香港民意研究所發佈會 - 傳媒參考資料
發佈會回顧
民研計劃發放施政報告跟進調查結果
及企業社會責任調查結果
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。
公報簡要
民研計劃於十一月初和十二月中由真實訪問員以隨機抽樣電話訪問方式分別成功訪問了1,005和1,014名香港居民。施政報告發表一個月後的跟進調查顯示，市民對施政報告的評價與即時調查時差別不大，滿意率淨值為負41個百分點，滿意度評分則為29.9分。另外，市民對特首施政方針的滿意率淨值相比上年度的負70個百分點大幅回升至負42個百分點。企業社會責任調查方面，最新結果為：九巴在本地公共交通機構中表現最好，而港鐵的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低；數碼通電訊在本地電訊公司中表現最好；恒生銀行在本地銀行及金融服務公司中表現最好，但恒生銀行、匯豐銀行和中國銀行的評分均為2008年有紀錄以來新低，當中匯豐銀行評分的跌幅尤為巨大；長江實業在本地地產商及物業發展公司中表現最好，而新鴻基地產的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低；百佳在本地零售公司中表現最好，評分創2008年有紀錄以來新高；大快活在本地連鎖式快餐店中表現最好。調查的實效回應比率分別為63.9%和68.7%。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+/-6%，評分誤差不超過+/-2.7。
樣本資料
施政報告跟進調查
| 調查日期 | ： | 18-22/12/2020 |
| 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] | ： | 1,014 (包括503個固網及511個手機樣本) |
| 實效回應比率[2] | ： | 68.7% |
| 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+/-6%，評分誤差不超過+/-2.4 |
| 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《二零一九年年中人口數字》，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》（2019年版）。 |
企業社會責任 (評分調查)
| 調查日期 | ： | 9-13/11/2020 |
| 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] | ： | 1,005 (包括512個固網及493個手機樣本) |
| 實效回應比率[2] | ： | 63.9% |
| 抽樣誤差[3] | ： | 在95%置信水平下，評分誤差不超過+/-2.7 |
| 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《二零一九年年中人口數字》，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》（2019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2018年7月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。
施政報告跟進調查
以下是2018至2020年施政報告的跟進調查結果，與同年即時調查結果並列：
| 即時調查[4] | 首輪跟進調查 | 跟進調查／ 次輪跟進調查 |
變化 | |
| 2020年度[5] | ||||
| 調查日期 | 25/11/20 | -- | 18-22/12/20 | -- |
| 樣本數目 | 512 | -- | 640 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 77.7% | -- | 68.7% | -- |
| 施政報告：滿意率[6] | 19% | -- | 13+/-3% | -6%[7] |
| 施政報告：不滿率[6] | 64% | -- | 54+/-4% | -10%[7] |
| 滿意率淨值 | -46% | -- | -41+/-6% | +4% |
| 平均量值[6] | 2.0 | -- | 2.1+/-0.1 | +0.1 |
| 施政報告滿意度評分 | 27.2 | -- | 29.9+/-2.4 | +2.8 |
| 施政方針：滿意率[6] | -- | -- | 16+/-3% | -- |
| 施政方針：不滿率[6] | -- | -- | 57+/-4% | -- |
| 滿意率淨值 | -- | -- | -42+/-6% | -- |
| 平均量值[6] | -- | -- | 2.1+/-0.1 | -- |
| 2019年度 | ||||
| 調查日期 | 16/10/19 | 17-18/10/19 | 11-14/11/19 | -- |
| 樣本數目 | 679 | 512 | 519 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 80.0% | 63.7% | 70.4% | -- |
| 施政報告：滿意率[6] | 17% | 11%[7] | 9+/-3% | -2% |
| 施政報告：不滿率[6] | 65% | 73%[7] | 75+/-4% | +2% |
| 滿意率淨值 | -47% | -62%[7] | -66+/-6% | -4% |
| 平均量值[6] | 2.0 | 1.8[7] | 1.7+/-0.1 | -0.1 |
| 施政報告滿意度評分 | 29.7 | 23.3[7] | 23.2+/-2.4 | -0.1 |
| 施政方針：滿意率[6] | -- | 11% | 9+/-3% | -2% |
| 施政方針：不滿率[6] | -- | 78% | 79+/-4% | +1% |
| 滿意率淨值 | -- | -67% | -70+/-5% | -3% |
| 平均量值[6] | -- | 1.7 | 1.7+/-0.1 | -- |
| 2018年度 | ||||
| 調查日期 | 10/10/18 | 11-12/10/18 | 22-24/10/18 | -- |
| 樣本數目 | 534 | 503 | 1,006 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 65.9% | 65.3% | 63.4% | -- |
| 施政報告：滿意率[6] | 33% | 32% | 30% | -2% |
| 施政報告：不滿率[6] | 34% | 33% | 39% | +6%[7] |
| 滿意率淨值 | -1% | -1% | -9% | -8% |
| 平均量值[6] | 2.9 | 2.8 | 2.8 | -0.1 |
| 施政報告滿意度評分 | 48.5 | 50.5 | 49.7 | -0.8 |
| 施政方針：滿意率[6] | -- | 42% | 39% | -3% |
| 施政方針：不滿率[6] | -- | 35% | 36% | +1% |
| 滿意率淨值 | -- | 7% | 2% | -5% |
| 平均量值[6] | -- | 3.0 | 2.9 | -- |
[4] 即時調查的題目會撇除未聞／不知道施政報告內容的被訪者，表內數字已是次樣本數目。
[5] 2020年度沒有在施政報告發表一兩日後進行跟進調查。
[6] 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。
[7] 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。
施政報告發表一個月後的跟進調查顯示，13%對施政報告表示滿意，54%表示不滿，滿意率淨值為負41個百分點，平均量值為2.1分，即整體上接近「幾不滿」，而滿意度評分則為29.9分，與即時調查比較，滿意率淨值及評分均輕微上升。調查亦顯示，16%被訪市民滿意林鄭月娥的施政方針，而表示不滿的，則佔57%，滿意率淨值相比上年度的負70個百分點大幅回升至負42個百分點，而平均量值為2.1，即整體上接近「幾不滿」。
企業社會責任調查
企業社會責任調查目的為了解市民對不同商業機構的印象，從而鼓勵良心企業貢獻社會，並選出最佳企業。有關調查共分為六個單元，分別為1) 公共交通系列；2) 電訊系列；3) 銀行及金融服務系列；4) 地產及物業發展系列；5) 零售系列及6) 快餐店系列。
調查分為兩個階段，在第一階段提名調查，訪問員會要求被訪者在未經提示下說出最多五個他們最熟悉的相關企業，首三個最多被訪者提及的企業，將進入第二階段調查。在第二階段評分調查，訪問員會要求被訪者就入選企業的社會責任表現以0至100分進行個別評分，0分代表表現極差，100分代表表現極佳，50分代表一半半。
公共交通機構
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的公共交通機構分別是九巴、港鐵及城巴。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 19-20/7/17 | 4/1/18 | 20-23/7/18 | 5-6/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 503[8] | 500 | 500 | 509 | 528 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 55.2% | 58.5% | 50.8% | 66.6% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 九巴 | 63.1 | 63.8 | 59.7[9] | 64.3[9] | 61.6+/-1.8 | -2.7[9] |
| 城巴 | 62.2[9] | 60.0[9] | 59.5 | 62.9[9] | 57.8+/-2.1 | -5.1[9] |
| 港鐵 | 62.2[9] | 60.1[9] | 56.2[9] | 47.3[9] | 46.5+/-2.6 | -0.8 |
[8] 該調查結果公佈時尚未包括手機樣本。上表結果已更新為固網樣本及手機樣本的合併統計數字，惟於判斷變化是否超過抽樣誤差時仍然使用首次公佈的數字計算。
[9] 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，在本地公共交通機構中，市民認為九巴的社會責任表現最好，得61.6分。而城巴和港鐵則分別得57.8及46.5分。港鐵的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低。
電訊公司
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的電訊公司分別是「3」流動電話、中國移動及數碼通電訊。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 16-17/8/17 | 5-6/2/18 | 5-6/9/18 / 18-20/9/18 | 5-6/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 611[10] | 505 | 511 / 1,002 | 509 | 543 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 57.6% | 61.2% | 51.3% / 55.6% | 66.6% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 數碼通電訊 | -- | 51.1 | 54.2[11] | 56.1 | 53.3+/-2.1 | -2.8[11] |
| 「3」流動電話 | 50.7[11] | 45.6[11] | -- | 52.3 | 50.4+/-2.2 | -1.9 |
| 中國移動 | -- | -- | 47.6 | 48.0 | 44.4+/-2.7 | -3.6 |
| 電訊盈科 | 54.1[11] | 51.7[11] | 54.5[11] [12] | -- | -- | -- |
| 香港寬頻 | 58.6 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
[10] 該調查結果公佈時尚未包括手機樣本。上表結果已更新為固網樣本及手機樣本的合併統計數字，惟於判斷變化是否超過抽樣誤差時仍然使用首次公佈的數字計算。
[11] 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。
[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，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。
最新調查顯示，在本地電訊公司中，市民認為數碼通電訊的社會責任表現最好，得53.3分。而「3」流動電話和中國移動則分別得50.4及44.4分。
銀行及金融服務公司
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的銀行及金融服務公司分別是匯豐銀行、中國銀行及恒生銀行。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 12-13/9/17 | 5-6/3/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 621[13] | 501 | 545 | 513 | 581 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 68.8% | 57.7% | 67.9% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 恒生銀行 | 63.0[14] | 62.8 | 64.5 | 63.1 | 56.5+/-2.0 | -6.6[14] |
| 匯豐銀行 | 61.2[14] | 60.6 | 62.9 | 58.9[14] | 46.3+/-2.0 | -12.6[14] |
| 中國銀行 | 56.1[14] | 57.4 | 59.3 | 48.1[14] | 45.4+/-2.4 | -2.7 |
[13] 該調查結果公佈時尚未包括手機樣本。上表結果已更新為固網樣本及手機樣本的合併統計數字，惟於判斷變化是否超過抽樣誤差時仍然使用首次公佈的數字計算。
[14] 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，在本地銀行及金融服務公司中，市民認為恒生銀行的社會責任表現最好，得56.5分。而匯豐銀行和中國銀行則分別得46.3及45.4分。當中匯豐銀行評分的跌幅尤為巨大。三間銀行的評分均為2008年有紀錄以來新低。
地產商及物業發展公司
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的地產商及物業發展公司分別是新鴻基地產、長江實業及恆基兆業。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 16-18/10/17 | 18-19/4/18 | 21-24/1/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 546 | 503 | 519 | 513 | 564 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 63.0% | 56.7% | 59.0% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 長江實業 | 49.8[15] | 50.3 | 47.9 | 51.2[15] | 53.5+/-2.2 | +2.3 |
| 恆基兆業 | 52.0[15] | 50.7 | 48.8 | 49.2 | 48.1+/-2.2 | -1.0 |
| 新鴻基地產 | 52.1[15] | 48.4[15] | 49.6 | 47.6 | 45.1+/-2.3 | -2.5 |
[15] 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，在本地地產商及物業發展公司中，市民認為長江實業的社會責任表現最好，得53.5分。而恆基兆業和新鴻基地產則分別得48.1及45.1分。新鴻基地產的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低。
零售公司
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的零售公司分別是百佳、惠康及7-11。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 8-9/11/17 | 8-9/5/18 | 14-19/3/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 504 | 511 | 565 | 513 | 524 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 56.1% | 60.7% | 73.1% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 百佳 | 55.1[16] | 55.8 | 53.8 | 54.7 | 57.1+/-2.0 | +2.4 |
| 惠康 | 56.0[16] | 57.0 | 55.7 | 56.9 | 53.0+/-2.1 | -3.9[16] |
| 7-11 | 57.0[16] | 57.7 | 55.9 | 57.8 | 52.4+/-2.1 | -5.4[16] |
[16] 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，在本地零售公司中，市民認為百佳的社會責任表現最好，得57.1分。而惠康和7-11則分別得53.0及52.4分。百佳的評分創2008年有紀錄以來新高。
連鎖式快餐店
在提名調查中，最多被訪者提及的連鎖式快餐店分別是大家樂、大快活及麥當勞。以下是相關企業的最新評分：
| 調查日期 | 6/12/17 | 6-7/6/18 | 20-23/5/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 502 | 502 | 687 | 513 | 527 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 59.9% | 56.0% | 61.9% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 大快活 | 55.5 | 57.1 | 55.9 | 56.4 | 54.8+/-2.0 | -1.7 |
| 麥當勞 | 55.7 | 58.2[17] | 56.8 | 56.8 | 52.8+/-2.2 | -4.0[17] |
| 大家樂 | 53.2 | 57.3[17] | 55.1[17] | 55.6 | 50.8+/-2.1 | -4.8[17] |
[17] 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，在本地連鎖式快餐店中，市民認為大快活的社會責任表現最好，得54.8分。而麥當勞和大家樂則分別得52.8及50.8分。
數據分析
施政報告發表一個月後的跟進調查顯示，市民對施政報告的評價與即時調查時差別不大，滿意率淨值為負41個百分點，滿意度評分則為29.9分。另外，市民對特首施政方針的滿意率淨值相比上年度的負70個百分點大幅回升至負42個百分點。
企業社會責任調查方面，最新結果為：九巴在本地公共交通機構中表現最好，而港鐵的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低；數碼通電訊在本地電訊公司中表現最好；恒生銀行在本地銀行及金融服務公司中表現最好，但恒生銀行、匯豐銀行和中國銀行的評分均為2008年有紀錄以來新低，當中匯豐銀行評分的跌幅尤為巨大；長江實業在本地地產商及物業發展公司中表現最好，而新鴻基地產的評分再創2008年有紀錄以來新低；百佳在本地零售公司中表現最好，評分創2008年有紀錄以來新高；大快活在本地連鎖式快餐店中表現最好。
January 5, 2021
Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute Press Conference - Press Materials
Press Conference Live
POP releases results of Policy Address follow-up survey and
results of corporate social responsibility survey
Special Announcement
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.
Abstract
POP successfully interviewed 1,005 and 1,014 Hong Kong residents by random telephone surveys conducted by real interviewers in early November and mid-December respectively. The follow-up survey conducted a month after the Policy Address was delivered shows that people’s appraisal toward the Policy Address have not changed much since the instant poll. The net satisfaction rate is negative 41 percentage points while the satisfaction rating is 29.9 marks. Meanwhile, the net satisfaction rate of CE’s policy direction bounced back to negative 42 percentage points from last year’s 70 percentage points. As for the survey on corporate social responsibility (CSR), the latest results are: KMB is the best local public transportation, while the rating of MTR again fell to an all-time record low since 2008; Smartone is the best local telecommunication corporation; Hang Seng Bank is the best local bank and financial services company, but the ratings of Hang Seng Bank, HSBC and Bank of China are at all-time record low since 2008, among which the drop in the rating of HSBC is especially huge; Cheung Kong Property is the best local real estate and property development company, while the rating of Sun Hung Kai Properties again fell to an all-time record low since 2008; ParknShop is the best local retail company, its rating rose to an all-time record high since 2008; Fairwood is the best local fast food restaurant chain. The effective response rates of the surveys are 63.9% and 68.7% respectively. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4%, that of net values is +/-6% and that of ratings is +/-2.7 at 95% confidence level.
Contact Information
Policy Address Follow-up Survey
| Date of survey | : | 18-22/12/2020 |
| Survey method | : | Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size[1] | : | 1,014 (including 503 landline and 511 mobile samples) |
| Effective response rate[2] | : | 68.7% |
| Sampling error[3] | : | Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, that of net values not more than +/-6% and that of ratings not more than +/-2.4 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 2019”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2019 Edition)”. |
Corporate Social Responsibility (Rating Survey)
| Date of survey | : | 9-13/11/2020 |
| Survey method | : | Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size[1] | : | 1,005 (including 512 landline and 493 mobile samples) |
| Effective response rate[2] | : | 63.9% |
| Sampling error[3] | : | Sampling error of ratings not more than +/-2.7 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 2019”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2019 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] In July 2018, POP 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.
Policy Address Follow-up Survey
Results of the Policy Address follow-up surveys of 2018 to 2020 together with their corresponding instant polls are tabulated below:
| Instant poll[4] | First follow-up survey |
Follow-up / Second follow-up survey | Change | |
| 2020[5] | ||||
| Date of survey | 25/11/20 | -- | 18-22/12/20 | -- |
| Sample size | 512 | -- | 640 | -- |
| Response rate | 77.7% | -- | 68.7% | -- |
| Policy Address: Satisfaction rate[6] | 19% | -- | 13+/-3% | -6%[7] |
| Policy Address: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | 64% | -- | 54+/-4% | -10%[7] |
| Net satisfaction rate | -46% | -- | -41+/-6% | +4% |
| Mean value[6] | 2.0 | -- | 2.1+/-0.1 | +0.1 |
| Satisfaction rating of Policy Address | 27.2 | -- | 29.9+/-2.4 | +2.8 |
| Policy direction: Satisfaction rate[6] | -- | -- | 16+/-3% | -- |
| Policy direction: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | -- | -- | 57+/-4% | -- |
| Net satisfaction rate | -- | -- | -42+/-6% | -- |
| Mean value[6] | -- | -- | 2.1+/-0.1 | -- |
| 2019 | ||||
| Date of survey | 16/10/19 | 17-18/10/19 | 11-14/11/19 | -- |
| Sample size | 679 | 512 | 519 | -- |
| Response rate | 80.0% | 63.7% | 70.4% | -- |
| Policy Address: Satisfaction rate[6] | 17% | 11%[7] | 9+/-3% | -2% |
| Policy Address: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | 65% | 73%[7] | 75+/-4% | +2% |
| Net satisfaction rate | -47% | -62%[7] | -66+/-6% | -4% |
| Mean value[6] | 2.0 | 1.8[7] | 1.7+/-0.1 | -0.1 |
| Satisfaction rating of Policy Address | 29.7 | 23.3[7] | 23.2+/-2.4 | -0.1 |
| Policy direction: Satisfaction rate[6] | -- | 11% | 9+/-3% | -2% |
| Policy direction: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | -- | 78% | 79+/-4% | +1% |
| Net satisfaction rate | -- | -67% | -70+/-5% | -3% |
| Mean value[6] | -- | 1.7 | 1.7+/-0.1 | -- |
| 2018 | ||||
| Date of survey | 10/10/18 | 11-12/10/18 | 22-24/10/18 | -- |
| Sample size | 534 | 503 | 1,006 | -- |
| Response rate | 65.9% | 65.3% | 63.4% | -- |
| Policy Address: Satisfaction rate[6] | 33% | 32% | 30% | -2% |
| Policy Address: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | 34% | 33% | 39% | +6%[7] |
| Net satisfaction rate | -1% | -1% | -9% | -8% |
| Mean value[6] | 2.9 | 2.8 | 2.8 | -0.1 |
| Satisfaction rating of Policy Address | 48.5 | 50.5 | 49.7 | -0.8 |
| Policy direction: Satisfaction rate[6] | -- | 42% | 39% | -3% |
| Policy direction: Dissatisfaction rate[6] | -- | 35% | 36% | +1% |
| Net satisfaction rate | -- | 7% | 2% | -5% |
| Mean value[6] | -- | 3.0 | 2.9 | -- |
[4] Questions in instant surveys would exclude respondents who had not heard of / did not have any knowledge of the Policy Address. Figures in the table are subsample sizes.
[5] No follow-up survey was conducted one to two days after the Policy Address was delivered in 2020.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
The follow-up survey conducted a month after the Policy Address was delivered shows that 13% were satisfied with the Policy Address and 54% were dissatisfied, thus a net satisfaction rate of negative 41 percentage points. The mean value was 2.1, meaning close to “somewhat dissatisfied” in general. The satisfaction rating was 29.9 marks. Both the net satisfaction rate and the rating have registered slight increase since the instant poll. The survey also shows that 16% were satisfied with Carrie Lam’s policy direction, while 57% expressed dissatisfaction, thus the net satisfaction rate bounced back to negative 42 percentage points from last year’s negative 70 percentage points. The mean value was 2.1, meaning close to “somewhat dissatisfied” in general.
Survey on Corporate Social Responsibility
The survey series on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) aims to gauge the public image of different commercial organizations in order to encourage them to become ethical companies and select the best corporations. There are a total of six modules under this survey series, namely, 1) Public Transportation, 2) Telecommunication, 3) Banks and Financial Services, 4) Real Estate and Property Development, 5) Retail, and 6) Fast Food Restaurant.
The surveys were conducted in two stages. In the first stage naming survey, respondents were requested to nominate, unprompted, at most five relevant corporations that they were most familiar with. The three most frequently cited names would enter the next stage. During the second stage rating survey, respondents would be asked to rate the CSR performance for each of the shortlisted corporations using a 0-100 scale, in which 0 indicates extremely poor performance, 100 indicates extremely good performance, and 50 means half-half.
Public Transportation
In the naming survey, the public transportations mentioned most frequently were KMB, MTR and Citybus. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 19-20/7/17 | 4/1/18 | 20-23/7/18 | 5-6/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 503[8] | 500 | 500 | 509 | 528 | -- |
| Response rate | 55.2% | 58.5% | 50.8% | 66.6% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| KMB | 63.1 | 63.8 | 59.7[9] | 64.3[9] | 61.6+/-1.8 | -2.7[9] |
| Citybus | 62.2[9] | 60.0[9] | 59.5 | 62.9[9] | 57.8+/-2.1 | -5.1[9] |
| MTR | 62.2[9] | 60.1[9] | 56.2[9] | 47.3[9] | 46.5+/-2.6 | -0.8 |
[8] The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample. However, whether changes have gone beyond sampling errors is still determined based on the figures in the first release.
[9] 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 showed that KMB was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local public transportations, scored 61.6 marks, while Citybus and MTR scored 57.8 and 46.5 marks respectively. The rating of MTR again fell to an all-time record low since 2008.
Telecommunication Corporations
In the naming survey, the telecommunication corporations mentioned most frequently were “3” Mobile, China Mobile and Smartone. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 16-17/8/17 | 5-6/2/18 | 5-6/9/18 / 18-20/9/18 | 5-6/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 611[10] | 505 | 511 / 1,002 | 509 | 543 | -- |
| Response rate | 57.6% | 61.2% | 51.3% / 55.6% | 66.6% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Smartone | -- | 51.1 | 54.2[11] | 56.1 | 53.3+/-2.1 | -2.8[11] |
| “3” Mobile | 50.7[11] | 45.6[11] | -- | 52.3 | 50.4+/-2.2 | -1.9 |
| China Mobile | -- | -- | 47.6 | 48.0 | 44.4+/-2.7 | -3.6 |
| PCCW | 54.1[11] | 51.7[11] | 54.5[11] [12] | -- | -- | -- |
| HKBN | 58.6 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
[10] The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample. However, whether changes have gone beyond sampling errors is still determined based on the figures in the first release.
[11] 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.
[12] 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.
Our latest survey showed that Smartone was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local telecommunication corporations, scored 53.3 marks, while “3” Mobile and China Mobile scored 50.4 and 44.4 marks respectively.
Banks and Financial Services Companies
In the naming survey, the banks and financial services companies mentioned most frequently were HSBC, Bank of China and Hang Seng Bank. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 12-13/9/17 | 5-6/3/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 621[13] | 501 | 545 | 513 | 581 | -- |
| Response rate | 68.8% | 57.7% | 67.9% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Hang Seng Bank | 63.0[14] | 62.8 | 64.5 | 63.1 | 56.5+/-2.0 | -6.6[14] |
| HSBC | 61.2[14] | 60.6 | 62.9 | 58.9[14] | 46.3+/-2.0 | -12.6[14] |
| Bank of China | 56.1[14] | 57.4 | 59.3 | 48.1[14] | 45.4+/-2.4 | -2.7 |
[13] The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample. However, whether changes have gone beyond sampling errors is still determined based on the figures in the first release.
[14] 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 showed that Hang Seng Bank was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local banks and financial services companies, scored 56.5 marks, while HSBC and Bank of China scored 46.3 and 45.4 marks respectively. The drop in the rating of HSBC is especially huge. The ratings of all three banks are at all-time record low since 2008.
Real Estate and Property Development Companies
In the naming survey, the real estate and property development companies mentioned most frequently were Sun Hung Kai Properties, Cheung Kong Property and Henderson Land Development. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 16-18/10/17 | 18-19/4/18 | 21-24/1/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 546 | 503 | 519 | 513 | 564 | -- |
| Response rate | 63.0% | 56.7% | 59.0% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Cheung Kong Property | 49.8[15] | 50.3 | 47.9 | 51.2[15] | 53.5+/-2.2 | +2.3 |
| Henderson Land Development | 52.0[15] | 50.7 | 48.8 | 49.2 | 48.1+/-2.2 | -1.0 |
| Sun Hung Kai Properties | 52.1[15] | 48.4[15] | 49.6 | 47.6 | 45.1+/-2.3 | -2.5 |
[15] 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 showed that Cheung Kong Property was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local real estate and property development companies, scored 53.5 marks, while Henderson Land Development and Sun Hung Kai Properties scored 48.1 and 45.1 marks respectively. The rating of Sun Hung Kai Properties again fell to an all-time record low since 2008.
Retail Companies
In the naming survey, the retail companies mentioned most frequently were ParknShop, Wellcome and 7-Eleven. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 8-9/11/17 | 8-9/5/18 | 14-19/3/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 504 | 511 | 565 | 513 | 524 | -- |
| Response rate | 56.1% | 60.7% | 73.1% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| ParknShop | 55.1[16] | 55.8 | 53.8 | 54.7 | 57.1+/-2.0 | +2.4 |
| Wellcome | 56.0[16] | 57.0 | 55.7 | 56.9 | 53.0+/-2.1 | -3.9[16] |
| 7-Eleven | 57.0[16] | 57.7 | 55.9 | 57.8 | 52.4+/-2.1 | -5.4[16] |
[16] 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 showed that ParknShop was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local retail companies, scored 57.1 marks, while Wellcome and 7-Eleven scored 53.0 and 52.4 marks respectively. The rating of ParknShop rose to an all-time record high since 2008.
Fast Food Restaurant Chains
In the naming survey, the fast food restaurant chains mentioned most frequently were Café de Coral, Fairwood and McDonald’s. The latest ratings of these corporations are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 6/12/17 | 6-7/6/18 | 20-23/5/19 | 19-20/8/19 | 9-13/11/20 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 502 | 502 | 687 | 513 | 527 | -- |
| Response rate | 59.9% | 56.0% | 61.9% | 69.8% | 63.9% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Fairwood | 55.5 | 57.1 | 55.9 | 56.4 | 54.8+/-2.0 | -1.7 |
| McDonald’s | 55.7 | 58.2[17] | 56.8 | 56.8 | 52.8+/-2.2 | -4.0[17] |
| Café de Coral | 53.2 | 57.3[17] | 55.1[17] | 55.6 | 50.8+/-2.1 | -4.8[17] |
[17] 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 showed that Fairwood was considered as having the best CSR reputation among local fast food restaurant chains, scored 54.8 marks, while McDonald’s and Café de Coral scored 52.8 and 50.8 marks respectively.
Data Analysis
The follow-up survey conducted a month after the Policy Address was delivered shows that people’s appraisal toward the Policy Address have not changed much since the instant poll. The net satisfaction rate is negative 41 percentage points while the satisfaction rating is 29.9 marks. Meanwhile, the net satisfaction rate of CE’s policy direction bounced back to negative 42 percentage points from last year’s 70 percentage points.
As for the survey on corporate social responsibility (CSR), the latest results are: KMB is the best local public transportation, while the rating of MTR again fell to an all-time record low since 2008; Smartone is the best local telecommunication corporation; Hang Seng Bank is the best local bank and financial services company, but the ratings of Hang Seng Bank, HSBC and Bank of China are at all-time record low since 2008, among which the drop in the rating of HSBC is especially huge; Cheung Kong Property is the best local real estate and property development company, while the rating of Sun Hung Kai Properties again fell to an all-time record low since 2008; ParknShop is the best local retail company, its rating rose to an all-time record high since 2008; Fairwood is the best local fast food restaurant chain.
