民研資訊

專欄文章

2025-01-26

編按：基於各種技術原因，香港民研暫時擱置所有自費研究活動。不過，自去年推出的民調科普文章，將會繼續發佈。文章嘗試以淺白語言、簡短篇幅，讓讀者掌握解讀數據的方法，並以不定期形式發佈。

【民調101】百分比不易用？

幾乎所有社會科學的調查，都會以百分比來表達結果。例如最近有媒體報導：「調查顯示，38% 中小企表示，營業信心受美國總統換屆影響，其中 62% 因為美國可能對進口商品徵收新關稅，59% 因為經濟環境改變。」

這個報導準確引述數字，但以科普教育來說，我們大可以討論一下百分比基數的問題。數據顯示，38% 中小企當中的 62% 擔心美國新關稅，其實只佔受訪中小企的 24%。同樣，因為經濟環境改變而影響信心者，其實只是 38% 當中的 59% ，即 22%。雖然數字的確反映兩個因素同屬重要，但只要留意每個數字的基數，便會發現這些擔心未必屬於「主流意見」。

因此，以下的描述可能更加理想：「調查顯示，超過三分之一中小企表示，營業信心受美國總統換屆影響，尤其是美國可能對進口商品徵收新關稅，以及經濟環境改變，各佔五分之一受訪中小企。」

Editor’s Note: Due to various technical reasons, HKPORI has suspended all self-financed research activities. However, our effort to promote popular science launched last year will continue. We will use sharp plain languages to help readers grasp the skills of reading figures, and publish these short articles from time to time.

[Polling 101] Percentages Are Not Easy to Use?

In almost all social science surveys, the results are expressed in percentages. For example, a recent media report says, “The survey shows that 38% of SMEs said their business confidence was affected by the change of the U.S. President, of which 62% were due to the possibility of the U.S. imposing new tariffs on imports, and 59% were due to changes in the economic environment.”

This report is accurate in citing figures, but for the purpose of popular science education, we can discuss the issue of percentage base. The figures show that 62% among the 38% of SMEs are worried about new U.S. tariffs, which is actually only 24% of the SMEs surveyed. Similarly, those whose confidence has been affected by changes in the economic environment only accounted for 59% of the 38%, that is, 22%. While the figures do reflect that both factors are important, if one pays attention to the base of each figure, one will realize that these concerns may not necessarily be the “mainstream view”.

Therefore, the following description may be more desirable: “The survey shows that more than one-third of SMEs said their business confidence has been affected by the change of U.S. President, especially the possibility of new tariffs on imports from the U.S., as well as the change in the economic environment, each accounting for one-fifth of the SMEs interviewed.”

2025-01-10

今天，先跟大家講一些“一國兩制”的締造者──鄧小平在香港活動的事情。為什麼要談這個題目？皆因我翻閱早年“民研”和相關的統計數字，發覺鄧小平雖然逝世，但在逝世後一段頗長的日子裡，他仍是香港人熟悉和主動提及的人物。按道理，人去茶涼，浪淘盡千古風流人物，但為什麼他還有這樣的吸引力？試問，有多少中國的近代政治人物在下台後仍在民眾心中留下印象？近年只有前總理朱鎔基（“民研”數據可反映出來），以後有沒有？不知道。所以，鄧小平就是我這張“數字音樂椅”第一個聯想到的人。

1997年香港回歸時，很多人都遺憾鄧小平無法前來香港（他在1997年2月逝世），見證他設計的“一國兩制”正式啟動，只能由遺孀卓琳代作見證人。不過，其實鄧小平生前曾五次經過香港，有時是匆匆過境，但有時卻是特別任務在身。不過，這五次都是在中共建政之前，以後就沒有他再度來港的資料了。

第一次懷著救國之志經過香港

鄧小平第一次經過香港，是1920年9月11日。那時候，他只有十六歲，是年青力壯的小伙子，在大陸剛結束為期一年的“留法勤工儉學預備班”，與近百名青年一起乘船由上海出發，經香港前往法國。那時候，先後到法國勤工儉學的還有後來的中共領導人周恩來、陳毅等人。他們當年都懷著救國之志，希望學習外國的先進經驗，然後返國“趕走一切害人蟲……..革命造反永不停………徹底踩爛舊世界，革命江山萬代紅。”（這是中共後來的紅歌歌詞）

1921年6至8月期間，陳毅等學生曾闖鬧中國駐法公使館，痛毆秘書王曾思，並進佔里昂中法大學。行動失敗後，陳毅被武裝押返中國。中共後來讚譽他們的時候，也證實了這些事情，當然表達語言和解讀的角度就有所不同了。

噢！還有一事順道一提，就是當年周恩來在法國曾跟李彥和（即今天被視為“反中亂港”的李柱銘的父親）認識和詳談救國之道，此乃後話，容後再談。

回想鄧小平第一次經過香港，行程沒有什麼特別，就像今天一些中國學生前往外國留學時經過香港一樣。不過，當年很多中國留學生學成之後都回國奉獻和發展，今天的中國留學生則按各自的意願，孔雀東南飛。喜耶？嘆耶？我不懂評價，只能說中國人有自由了。

胡志明替鄧小平搭路喬裝到越南

不過，鄧小平第二次經過香港就有特別任務了。在這裡，先要交代1927年的事，中共中央已由武漢轉至上海，決定要大規模進行武裝起義。如從當年執政民國政府的角度看，這些人就是“搞動亂和暴亂”，像北京今天指有些人在香港“製造動亂”一樣，但角色和性質自然有正反不同的解讀，留與後人評說。

到了1929年，鄧小平已是中共中央秘書長，忽然接到命令，前往廣西策動全面的革命工作，既要恢復和建立黨組織，又要到處交朋友，建立關係網，更要醞釀暴力革命的機會。後來的“百色起義”，就是鄧小平和其他共產黨人張雲逸等在廣西部署，而且一舉成功的事例。

可是，鄧小平當時是國民黨的通緝犯，而且是重要犯人，行蹤必須保密。怎麼辦？他後來找到一個人幫助他，此人就是後來的越南共產黨、越南民主共和國和越南人民軍的主要創立者和領導人胡志明。兩人早已在法國相識。

胡志明後來到了上海搞地下工作，準備日後在越南起事。他知道鄧小平要前往廣西，但陸路不安全，於是建議鄧小平改用海路，並為他搭好關係，由上海到香港，再由香港乘船往越南，最後經中越邊境進入廣西，繞了一個大彎，可見香港確是一個非常有利的中轉地。國民政府沒有發覺，因為鄧小平已化名鄧斌，以商人身份前來香港。

其實那時候，已有不少中共黨員在香港，包括南方書記賀昌和夫人黃慕蘭，以及中共廣東省委軍委書記聶榮臻和夫人張瑞華，他們都住在跑馬地鳳凰台附近。鄧小平這次經過香港，主要是部署廣西的工作，逗留了幾天，十分低調，以免引起港英政府的干擾。

鄧小平到了廣西後，努力部署地下工作，先後在百色、龍州等地醞釀暴力革命。當時的工作十分順利，隨時可以行動，但不知怎的，中共中央忽然又急召他返上海。他於是在1930年1月第三次經過香港，急急趕返上海。

鄧小平第二次和第三次經過香港，都是來去匆匆，但第四次來到香港時，卻肩負特別任務，而且是非常重要的任務。且待下周細說。

‍

劉銳紹

Today, let us delve into some of the activities of Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), the architect of the “One Country, Two Systems” (一國兩制) principle, during his time in Hong Kong. Why address this topic? It’s because, after reviewing early “HKPORI” (Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute) data and related statistics, I discovered that while Deng Xiaoping passed away many years ago, he remained a well-known and frequently mentioned figure in Hong Kong for a significant period after his death. Generally, when people pass away, their influence fades, swept away by the tides of time. So, why does Deng Xiaoping still hold such appeal? How many modern Chinese political figures leave a lasting impression on the public after stepping down? In recent years, perhaps only former Premier Zhu Rongji (朱鎔基) has achieved similar recognition (as reflected in HKPORI data). Will there be others in the future? It’s hard to say. Thus, Deng Xiaoping was the first person that came to mind when considering this “musical chair of numbers”.

When Hong Kong returned to China in 1997, many regretted that Deng Xiaoping was unable to witness the formal implementation of his “One Country, Two Systems” design (he passed away in February 1997). Instead, his widow, Zhuo Lin (卓琳), served as his stand-in for the historic occasion. However, during his lifetime, Deng Xiaoping passed through Hong Kong five times. Sometimes, it was a quick transit, while on other occasions, he had specific missions to accomplish. Notably, all five visits occurred before the founding of the People’s Republic of China; there is no record of him returning to Hong Kong after that.

First Visit: Passing Through Hong Kong with a Dream to Save the Nation

Deng Xiaoping’s first journey through Hong Kong occurred on 11th September 1920. At the time, he was just 16 years old, a robust young man, fresh from completing a year-long “Work-Study Preparation Class” in mainland China. Together with nearly a hundred other young people, he set sail from Shanghai, passing through Hong Kong en route to France. Among those who later travelled to France for work-study programmes were other future Chinese Communist Party leaders, such as Zhou Enlai (周恩來) and Chen Yi (陳毅). They all shared a common goal: to learn from the advanced practices of foreign nations and return home to “drive out all harmful pests... revolution without rest... crush the old world entirely, and ensure the revolutionary cause endures for generations” (lyrics from later Communist Party revolutionary songs).

Between June and August 1921, students such as Chen Yi staged protests at the Chinese Legation in France, assaulting Secretary Wang Zengsi (王曾思) and occupying the Sino-French University in Lyon. Following the failure of these actions, Chen Yi was escorted back to China under armed guard. These events were later praised by the Chinese Communist Party, albeit with differing language and interpretations.

Oh, and one more thing worth mentioning: during his time in France, Zhou Enlai met and had in-depth discussions on national salvation with Li Yanhe (李彥和), the father of Martin Lee Chu-ming (李柱銘) (later labelled as “anti-China and disruptive to Hong Kong”). But that’s another story, to be discussed at a later time.

Reflecting on Deng Xiaoping’s first passage through Hong Kong, the trip was unremarkable, akin to how Chinese students today might transit through Hong Kong on their way to study abroad. However, back then, many Chinese students returned home to contribute and develop the country after completing their studies. Today, Chinese students tend to pursue their own paths abroad, spreading far and wide. Is this something to celebrate, or lament? I cannot judge, but it seems clear that Chinese people now enjoy greater freedom of choice.

Ho Chi Minh Helps Deng Xiaoping Disguise Himself for Vietnam

Deng Xiaoping’s second visit to Hong Kong, however, was tied to a special mission. To provide context, let us revisit 1927, when the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee moved from Wuhan to Shanghai and decided to launch large-scale armed uprisings. From the perspective of the ruling Nationalist Government at the time, these individuals were “instigators of chaos and rebellion,” akin to how Beijing today accuses some of “creating chaos” in Hong Kong. The roles and nature of these events, of course, are subject to differing interpretations, and history will judge them.

By 1929, Deng Xiaoping had risen to become the Secretary-General of the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee. He suddenly received orders to go to Guangxi to organise comprehensive revolutionary efforts. His tasks included rebuilding and establishing Party organisations, networking with allies, and preparing for violent revolution. The subsequent “Baise Uprising” (百色起義), which Deng Xiaoping and fellow communists such as Zhang Yunyi (張雲逸) orchestrated in Guangxi, stands as a successful example of such efforts.

However, as a wanted fugitive of the Nationalist Government—and a particularly high-profile one—Deng Xiaoping had to keep his movements secret. What could be done? He sought help from Ho Chi Minh (胡志明), a future key figure in the founding of the Vietnamese Communist Party, the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, and the Vietnamese People’s Army. The two had already met in France.

At the time, Ho Chi Minh was engaged in underground work in Shanghai, preparing for future uprisings in Vietnam. He knew it was unsafe for Deng Xiaoping to travel to Guangxi by land, so he suggested taking a sea route instead. Ho Chi Minh arranged for Deng to travel from Shanghai to Hong Kong, then by ship to Vietnam, and finally across the Sino-Vietnamese border into Guangxi—a long detour, but one that demonstrated Hong Kong’s strategic importance as a transit hub. Deng Xiaoping adopted the alias “Deng Bin” and posed as a businessman while in Hong Kong, successfully evading the notice of the Nationalist Government.

At that time, many Communist Party members were already in Hong Kong, including Southern Secretary He Chang (賀昌) and his wife Huang Mulan (黃慕蘭), as well as Guangdong Provincial Committee Military Secretary Nie Rongzhen (聶榮臻) and his wife Zhang Ruihua (張瑞華). They lived near Phoenix Terrace in Happy Valley. During this visit, Deng Xiaoping primarily focused on planning revolutionary activities in Guangxi. He stayed for only a few days and kept a low profile to avoid interference from the British Hong Kong authorities.

After arriving in Guangxi, Deng Xiaoping worked tirelessly to organise underground activities, preparing for armed uprisings in places like Baise and Longzhou. The work proceeded smoothly, and action could have been taken at any moment. However, for unknown reasons, the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee suddenly summoned him back to Shanghai. Thus, in January 1930, Deng Xiaoping passed through Hong Kong for the third time, this time in a hurry to return to Shanghai.

Deng Xiaoping’s second and third visits to Hong Kong were swift and purposeful. However, his fourth visit to Hong Kong was tied to an especially critical mission. Stay tuned for further details next week.

Johnny LAU

(The article was written in traditional Chinese and translated by AI tool.)

‍

2025-01-10

民意調查有用嗎？今個學年修讀我的《研究方法導論》課程的學生中，大約有五分之三認為，他們的知識並不源自於了解普通人的想法。有相當一部分學生認為，公眾意見其實並不重要，沒有人願意理會無權無勢的人們的聲音。有些學生甚至相信，統治精英比任何人都更了解情況，因此更適合為所有人作決策，讓他們替人民思考是無可厚非的。

主流教育並不著重理解人們想法

這些觀點並不令我感到驚訝。簡單回顧一下我們的主流教育經歷，除了以培養香港開放社會為重點的通識教育課程外（現已被廢除），根本與意見調查和調查方法幾乎毫無關係。大多數時候，學生只是通過重重複複的練習、考試去為下一次更多嚴苛的考核做好準備，而歷史、地理、科學或宗教研究等科目其實不太需要關注人們的想法及其背後的原因。

此外，學生普遍認為，修讀關於「個人與社會」等課題本身充滿了太多不確定性，而這種不確定性源自人們的「主觀、偏見、不理性、情緒化」，因此大家延伸至認為民意調查本身並不科學、結果毫無依據、結論並不可靠。波蘭有句諺語：「當兩個波蘭人見面，會有五種不同的意見。」的確，在個人和集體層面，意見的分佈會隨時間而改變，可能出現的組合和改變軌跡可以說是無窮無盡的，而我們從事民意調查和研究的就必須學會從中尋找意義。有時候，試圖理解人們的態度和看法時感覺就像是在追逐野鵝，因此許多人本能地避之則吉，而且會偏好技術為導向、職業訓練為基礎的學習經歷。

教育的本質與公民意識

哈佛大學哲學教授丹妮爾·艾倫（Danielle Allen）就觀察到，在美國教育體系中，給予人文和社會研究的時間和資源不足。她一針見血地指出：「教育本身是民主的源動力——閱讀、寫作和合作是政治參與過程中不可缺少的基本工具。」

具體而言，當我們越來越被吸引去接受由人工智能驅動、機器輔助的學習和決策，我們還可以從這些「人文社會」教育中得到的軟技能，或者學習在人與人之間的互動與合作中，大家還能期望獲得什麼回報？而在那些貶視民主治理；甚至視民主自由為「禁區」的地區，會更容易忽視艾倫的建議嗎？

在我看來，在思考這些問題時有三件事至關重要：
一）認知能力，因為這對形成個人判斷至關重要；
二）我們必須不斷學習為自己以及相關的人作出更好的決策；
三）我們必須學會欣賞人們在任何事情和一切事物上存在的分歧。

我也同意艾倫的觀點：教育的目的是賦予公民參與公共事務的能力，並學會如何儘管在性別、種族、社會背景、信仰、價值觀和政治等明顯差異下，仍然有彼此溝通相處的可能。我相信教育的本質在於培養和維持一個具有公民意識和文明的文化。

警惕群體的「一致性」

誠然，我們都領教過那些自認為比其他人更了解情況的統治精英，但若我們仔細觀察任何一個由個人組成的社群，會發現「一致性」只是例外，「多樣性」才是常態。當關於人類福祉的目的或手段的單一敘述被過於頻繁地用來堅持「一致」而犧牲「多元」時，我們更必須警惕。事實上，對於人們、身份或命運的「一刀切」式的簡單化，往往只是對真實人群的公式化歪曲。

那些假裝天下無敵、自以為是的領袖，只是在假裝而已。事實上，他們和我們一樣，只是普通人。我們都會犯錯，有時更錯得離譜。然而，當那些擁有巨大權力和資源的領導者犯錯時，我們全都會受他們所害，而且通常等我們發現之時，已經為時過晚了。

‍

陳家洛

（原文為英文，由 AI 工具轉譯中文後經人手校對；文章標題及內文標題由香港民研編輯所擬）

參考資料：
Danielle Allen, What Is Education For? Boston Review, 26 April 2016.
https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/danielle-allen-what-is-education-for/

Are surveys useful? About three-fifths of my students say their knowledge is derived not from asking what ordinary people think. A plurality of them conclude that public opinion doesn’t matter because the people are powerless and not listened to. Some students who believe that the ruling elites are better, if not the best, informed than anybody to make decisions for all, so it is ok for them to do the thinking for the people.

Mainstream Education Does Not Emphasise Understanding People's Thoughts

This does not surprise me. With perhaps the exception to the Liberal Studies curriculum with a strong focus on nurturing an open society for Hong Kong, which had been abolished, pre-tertiary educational experience had little to do with opinion surveys and survey methods. For the most part of it, students passed exams and braced themselves for many more ruthless assessments in History, Geography, Science, or Religious Studies which have no need to pay attention to what people think and why they think the way they do.

Moreover, students are under the impression that studying Individuals and Society is fraught with uncertainty that is originated from people who are subjective, biased, unreasonable, emotional, and by extension, hopelessly unreliable. There is a saying in Polish that “When 2 Poles meet, the result is 5 different opinions.” Moreover, the distribution of opinions does change from time to time. The possible combinations and trajectories are arguably infinite, and one must learn to make sense of all this. Trying to understand people’s attitudes and perceptions is like a wild goose chase, therefore many instinctively prefer some technologically oriented, vocational-experiential approaches to education.

The Essence of Education and Civic Awareness

Danielle Allen, a philosophy professor at Harvard University, has observed that the time and resources given to humanities and social studies are insufficient in the US education system. She has pithily argued that “education is a causal force behind democracy—reading, writing, and collaboration are the basic instruments of political action.”

Specifically, what would we get out of the investment in such soft skills for interaction and collaboration when we are increasingly enticed to embrace AI-driven, machine-assisted learning and decision-making? Is it not convenient for regions where democratic governance is either held at low esteem or has become “a no-go area” to dismiss Allen’s advice?

To my mind, there are 3 things at stake:
1) the cognitive ability, which is imperative for the formulation of one’s judgement,
2) we must keep learning to make better decisions for oneself and others concerned, and
3) we must learn how to appreciate disagreements about anything and everything.

I also agree with Allen that education is about empowering citizens to take part in public affairs and to learn to get along with one another notwithstanding the obvious differences in gender, race, social backgrounds, beliefs, values, and politics. It’s about nurturing and sustaining a civic, and civilized, culture.

Beware of "uniformity"

We know first-hand the ruling elites who always think they know better, let’s try to look at any community of individuals, uniformity is exceptional; diversity is the norm. But even when monolithic depictions about any means or ends of the people concerned are too often deployed to confirm the former at the expense of the latter, we must be wary of the danger that more often than not, one-size-fit-all formulations about people, identity, or destiny are but unnatural simplifications that bear little resemblance of the real people.

Leaders who pretend to know better are just pretending. They are just mortals like the rest of us. Humans err. When leaders who wield enormous power and resources over us make mistakes, we all suffer, only that it’s already too late when we find out.

‍

Kenneth CHAN Ka Lok

(Article titles and section headings were devised by HKPORI editors.)

‍

Reference:
Danielle Allen, What Is Education For? Boston Review, 26 April 2016.
https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/danielle-allen-what-is-education-for/

2025-01-09

‍專欄名稱：《話說民調》

每天我們都能在新聞、廣告、學術著作中看到各種調查結果。許多人也曾被服務提供者、學校，甚至朋友邀請參與調查。但是，人們能如何利用調查？調查結果是否值得信賴？為什麼有些調查被認為更可信，而另一些則不然？

在教育過程中，我們會經常展示調查結果相關的圖表或者更複雜的統計數字。不可否認，大多數時候，這些材料在課堂上被使用，甚至不加批判地被學生用於他們的報告和作業中。

每次學生們在聽到「研究」時，他們往往會自然聯想到「做調查」以收集感興趣的數據。因為我對學生的這個「想當然」感到困惑，為了更深入了解學生對調查和調查方法的具體看法，今個學年我決定在我的《研究方法導論》課程中邀請他們思考並回應以下問題：

1. 試提供至少一個專業調查及其得出的數據的例子。
2. 試提供至少一個非專業調查及其得出的數據的例子。
3. 如何區分專業調查與非專業調查？
4. 從世界民意研究協會（WAPOR）等專業和學術機構提供的行為準則、指引和報告中，你學到了什麼？
5. 就你而言，這些行為準則、指引和報告對你如何想像硏究有多大幫助？
6. 在你看來，人們通常對調查方法的「主觀期許」有哪些？
7. 在你看來，人們通常對調查方法的「錯誤認知」有哪些？
8. 作為一名大學生，在這階段的學習中你對調查方法和數據的態度變得「更正面 / 更負面 / 沒有改變」嗎？為什麼？
9. 在你的地方（如果不是香港，請在回答中注明），政治精英是否偶爾會密切關注專業機構 / 學術機構調查提供的數據？如果有，請至少舉一個例子來支持你的回答。
10. 基於你對上述問題的反思，試為香港能否自由地進行專業調查和發布數據的環境評分（1分為最不理想，10分為最理想），並分別為香港未來5年後和10年後的情況評分。

由於民意調查和數據經常在媒體中受到關注，學者、評論家、記者和政策制定者同樣希望我們相信意見調查和數據都廣泛應用於研究和政策制定中。作為公眾，我們更需要具備區分專業與非專業調查的能力。無論是在香港還是其他地方參考專業標準和實踐，如何讓我們更清楚認識到對民意調查和調查方法的「主觀期許」及「錯誤認知」？這個問題的重要性不言而喻。

從本週的通訊開始，我將和讀者在這𥚃分享從學生那裡學到的內容，希望反思我們可以在哪些方面做得更好，通過教育提升學生的數據素養，進而賦權年輕公民自主學習「驗證後再信任」的判斷能力。

在今天的香港，即使在這個開場白結束前，我自己也要學習不厭其煩地指出，在這一系列討論中我所表達的內容和觀點僅屬於我個人的，並負擔全部責任。當然，大家在這裡讀到的完全不代表任何大學或組織的立場。

祝大家有一個美好的2025年！

‍

陳家洛

（本文原文為英文，由 AI 工具轉譯為中文並經人手校對）

‍

Column name: Dialogues with Survey Data

Every day we are presented with survey results in news, advertisements, scholarly works. Many of us have been invited by service providers, schools, and even friends to participate in surveys. But what use can people make of surveys? Can surveys in general be trusted? Why are some surveys considered more trustworthy than others?

In education, we have been presented a table here or a chart there more too often. Admittedly, most of the time the materials in questions are used in class and reused by students in their papers and projects uncritically.

I have long been perplexed by how often when the word “research” is mentioned, students would think of “doing a survey” to gather data on whatever the topic of interest is. To find out more what students nowadays think about surveys and survey methods, I have invited them to consider the following issues in my Research Methods class:

1. Provide at least one example of professional survey and the resultant data.

2. Provide at least one example of unprofessional survey and the resultant data.

3. How can one separate the professional from the unprofessional

4. What have you learnt from the Code, Guidelines, and Reports provided by professional and scholarly bodies such as the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR)?

5. How helpful are the Code, Guidelines, and Reports as far as you are concerned?

6. What, in your view, constitute our wishful thinking about survey methods?

7. What, in your view, constitute our wrongful thinking about survey methods?

8. As a university student, have you become more / less / unchanged in your attitudes towards survey methods and data? How? Please explain.

9. Do the political elites in (please name your country in your answer if not Hong Kong) occasionally pay close and keen attention to data provided by professional / academic surveys? Please provide at least one example to support your answer.

10. Based on your own reflections with respect to the questions above, please rate Hong Kong’s environment nowadays for the freedom to conduct professional surveys and publish data (1 being the least favourable, 10 being the most favourable) and rate the same for Hong Kong in 5 years’ time and in 10 years’ time.

Opinion polls and surveys are widely used in research and policymaking. As opinion polls and survey data often receive attention in the media, scholars, commentators, journalists, and policymakers, we the public need to be able to differentiate between professional and unprofessional polls. With reference to the professional standards and practices, how can one become more aware of the wishful and wrongful thinking about opinion polls and survey methods in Hong Kong and elsewhere?

Starting with this week’s bulletin, I undertake to review what I learnt from the students. I intend to reflect on where we can do better to enhance data literacy through education and by extension, empower citizens to learn how to verify before trust.

It goes without saying that the contents and the viewpoints expressed herein are mine and mine alone. I am solely responsible for the work done which does not represent the stance of any university or organization.

May I wish you a Great 2025!

‍

Kenneth CHAN Ka Lok

‍

2025-01-09

專欄名稱：《數字音樂椅》

很多人對數字感到枯燥無味，包括我。不過，原來數字裡藏有很多知識和智慧。

近年來，我多看香港民意研究所（下稱“民研”）的調查和統計數字，驟眼看來，確有點悶，但後來發覺原來“民研”的數據庫是一個寶藏。它簡直是一個萬花筒，不單可以協助人類研究現實和歷史問題，再按歷史軌跡尋找解決今天問題的方法；還可以從新舊數字裡發現和聯想到很多真人真事和真知灼見──只要你懂得發掘就行了。

這個大發現讓我在腦海中爆出一個怪念頭──把“民研”的數字和我過去五十多年採訪積累下來的所見所聞、所思所想結合起來，講一些大家較少聽過的故事（噢！不對，是真人真事），各位將可自得其趣，然後各自深思；如果覺得太傷腦筋，就當聽聽舊聞，輕鬆一下也好。

所以，訂閱和支持“民研”，不是專業人士、知識分子才會想到的事，也不是什麼敏感問題，普羅大眾也可以把單調的數字，變成愉快的“數字音樂椅”，坐上去，享受數字循環，你就會發覺“民研”能反映很多饒有趣味的數字輪迴和歷史怪圈。

‍

劉銳紹

‍

Column name: Numbers’ Musical Chairs

Many people, myself included, find numbers dull and uninteresting. However, it turns out that numbers contain a wealth of knowledge and wisdom.

In recent years, I’ve spent more time looking at the surveys and statistics from the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (HKPORI). At first glance, they do seem a bit tedious, but I later realised that HKPORI’s database is a treasure trove. It’s like a kaleidoscope: not only can it help us study real-world and historical issues, and use historical trajectories to find solutions to today’s problems, but it can also reveal and inspire countless real-life stories and valuable insights—if you know how to uncover them.

This major discovery sparked a quirky idea in my mind: to combine HKPORI’s numbers with the observations, experiences, and thoughts I’ve accumulated over more than fifty years as a journalist, and to tell some stories that people rarely hear (well, not stories—real events). You’ll be able to enjoy them in your own way and reflect on them in your own time. If you find it too intellectually taxing, just treat them as old anecdotes to relax and unwind.

So, subscribing to and supporting HKPORI isn’t something only professionals or intellectuals would think of, nor is it a sensitive issue. Ordinary people can also turn dry numbers into something delightful—like “musical chairs of numbers.” Sit down, enjoy the cycle of data, and you’ll discover that HKPORI reflects many fascinating numerical patterns and historical loops.

‍

Johnny Lau

(The article was written in traditional Chinese and translated by AI tool.)

‍

2025-01-09

（編按：香港民研今日舉行記者會，交代未來一年的發展路向及解釋香港民研重新定位的決定，主席及行政總裁鍾庭耀撰寫本文，闡述箇中思考。）

2025 是退休的好日子？

‍

數字上，2025是一個非常巧妙和工整的數字，它是0+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9的平方，也是以上所有數字三次方的總和。2025年1月25日，六星連珠，也是能得一見的奇景。我在想：2025看來是一個退休的好日子。

我在世界民意研究學會當了兩年會長，剛剛卸任，算是為香港和世界做了一點事，可退吧。不過，我又想：既然承諾了編寫一本全球通用的民研教科書，似乎還是退不了。

回望香港，我在民研領域工作了超過三分一個世紀，經歷先盛後衰，看著群龍散落，也感唏噓。「應否繼續堅持？」似乎不只是一個問題，而是一個感嘆。民研離開大學，在紛亂中得到無數市民的支持，是厚愛，也是責任。

三年前，友人勸我離開，要到什麼地方都可以。我同意，四海之內皆兄弟，此心安處是吾家。不過，我在「百分百香港」的舞台上說過：天地有理，人間有情。人生不僅要問理應如何，而是要問感覺怎樣？就這樣，我留了下來。

留下來，不是為了抗爭，而是為了堅持。少年的我著迷天文，領悟了先賢對真理的執着。宇宙的定律，不會因人而改。地心論、日心論、無神論、以至一切理論，可以一時受制於權柄，但真相從來不會因時制宜或因人而異。甘地說過，在歷史的長河裡，暴政必亡，真理必勝。

當下，去者已去，留者願留，各有抱負，各顯千秋。去者何妨落地生根，留者也要安身立命，不蔓不枝。曾經希望，在有生之年可以在宇宙穹蒼之下點指繁星。不過，現在科學昌明，一切星空奇景，都可以足不出戶便盡收眼簾。宇宙浩瀚無邊，人人渺小，人人要懂謙卑。

但願這個謙卑的執着，可以感染世人，可以令人民的聲音得到聆聽。世界民研的會章，開宗明義寫道：「民情民意是社會發展的原動力，專業民意研究可讓人民的聲音得以彰顯。」我就任會長兩年，首次把這個道理演繹成為「自由權利、專業素質和人文精神三結合」的發展綱領。作為學會接近八十年來的首個華人會長，我已盡量把我們的香港精神，結合民研世界的發展，讓香港繼續與世界接軌，保持中西文化的交匯。

在過去兩年的任期，環球同事和友好都不時問我關於香港的情況。我通常說：還可以。言下之意，是香港雖然倒退，但民研仍然運作。放眼四方，比香港更差的地方實在不少。更何況，為了避免利益衝突，我不會以會長身份啟動討論，博取同情。如果情況真是這麼壞，我會避席，或者辭職。兩年過去，我順利卸任，順勢轉向香港民研的發展。

新年伊始，民研已經蓄勢待發，重新起步。為的，已經不是三十年前的憧憬，而是怎樣回饋香港市民不離不棄的支持，和以另類方法把香港精神變成國際文化的一部份，更深更廣地服務全世界。

‍

鍾庭耀

(Editor’s note: HKPORI held a press conference today to outline our development direction for the coming year and explain our decision of repositioning. The President and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Chung, authored this article to elaborate on the considerations behind the decision.)

Is 2025 the Year for Retirement?

‍

Numerically, 2025 is a squarely neat number. It is the sum of 0+1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9 squared, and it is also the sum of the cubes of all these numbers. Incidentally, on 25 of January 2025, there will be a rare conjunction of six planets. These make me think: May be 2025 is a good year to retire.

I have just stepped down from my two-year presidency of the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR), so I have at least done something for Hong Kong and the world, maybe I can retire. But then I thought, “I have also promised to write a global textbook on public opinion research, seems that I cannot quit.

Looking back at Hong Kong, I have been working in the field of public opinion research for more than one-third of a century. I have witnessed a boom then a bust, and it is saddening to see the dissipation of talents. “Should I stay on?” Seems that it is not a question but an exclamation. When we left the university amidst social chaos, we had the support of countless citizens. Generosity brings responsibility.

Three years ago, I was advised to leave, and I could choose anywhere. I agreed, that everywhere can be my home. But as I said on the stage of “100% Hong Kong”, we have heavenly truth and universal love, so we do not just ask how things are, but also what we feel. I stayed.

I stayed not to fight, but to persevere. As a teenager, I was fascinated by astronomy, and I realized the persistence of the sages to the truth. The laws of the universe will not be changed by anyone. Geocentricity, heliocentrism, atheism, and all other theories may be restricted by the authorities at times, but the truth will never change. Mahatma Gandhi has taught us, “All through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall.”

Now that those who have gone have gone, those who stayed have stayed. Those not here should start building new homes, while those staying behind should live a new way of life without losing the basic principles. I once hoped that I could gaze the stars far away from civilization. Now, with the advancement of technology, I can see everything without leaving home. Under the boundless universe, humankind is so small. We must learn to be humble.

I hope this humble perseverance can move the world a bit, and make people’s voices heard. The Constitution of WAPOR starts with these words, “Public opinion is a critical force in shaping and transforming society. Properly conducted and disseminated survey research provides the public with a tool to measure opinions and attitudes in order to allow its voices to be heard.” After my two-year Presidency, I have managed to pin down three core values for WAPOR’s mission: Liberty, Quality and Humanity. Being the first Chinese President of WAPOR in nearly 80 years, I have tried my best to integrate our Hong Kong Spirit with the global development of WAPOR. I hope Hong Kong will continue to be connected with the world, and continues to be a cultural hub between the East and the West.

Over the past two years, I have been repeatedly asked by my international colleagues and how Hong Kong is doing. I usually say, “Still okay.” I actually mean to say that although Hong Kong has been moving backward, we are still functioning. If we look around, there are many places worse than Hong Kong. What is more, in order to avoid any conflict of interest, I would not initiate any discussion on Hong Kong’s problems from my leadership position. In case the is really that bad, I would either abstain myself from the discussion, or simply resign. None has happened. I have stepped down smoothly, and turned my attention to our local development.

At the beginning of this new year, our research team is getting ready for a new start. Perhaps not so much to actualize what we had envisaged 30 years ago, but to find a way to thank Hong Kong people for their unfailing support. We want to integrate HongKong with HumanKind, so that everybody benefits and everyone wins.

‍

Robert Chung

2024-12-31

2024年，是香港民研離開大學、獨立運作的第五年。這一年，我們在推進香港民調的發展之外，更決定重新定位香港民研，著力回應社會議題，並嘗試進行民調相關的公眾教育。

► 專題研究：用數據切入社會議題

這一年，香港民研進行了四次專題研究，分別就垃圾徵費、生育意願、照顧者支援政策、劏房管制進行不同形式的民意調查。這些專題由香港民研自主發起，旨在回應社會當前的討論。其中，10月份進行的生育意願專題是我們重新定位後的首個專題，由港人的生育考慮，帶出社交文化、房屋議題、教育制度的討論，希望在數據基礎上拓闊議題。

4月份進行的垃圾徵費民調，發現市民反對的是政策實施時間表；慎思民調更反映，市民經過理性討論後傾向支持垃圾徵費概念。於是，當政策推行失敗，就不應歸咎於市民對概念反感。

11月，香港民研又進行了照顧者支援政策慎思民調，顯示市民在了解政策及照顧者經驗後，傾向認為現行政策無效幫助照顧者。香港民研並以民調數據推算本港照顧者人口，從而推進有關照顧者定義的公共討論。

12月，回應政府提出的「簡樸房」政策，我們進行了有關劏房管制的民調，現正進行數據分析。敬請期待調查結果。

► 質性分析：解剖民意的複雜面向

今年1月，香港民研首次在網上意見群組調查加入開放式問題，了解市民支持／反對特首、對政府滿意／不滿意等的原因，然後透過「文字雲」（word cloud）的形式呈現答案中最常見的字眼。及至近期，香港民研就港府積極推動的盛事經濟，了解市民看法。開放式提問的答案顯示，市民對「夜繽紛」較有印象，但亦都有很多人表示對盛事沒有印象；而當市民描述印象時，最常見的字眼卻是「浪費」。

這一年間，研究員積極運用開放式題目取得的答案進行質性分析，受訪者不時會在答案中透露個人處境，部分市民甚至會以上百字回答，為量性調查的概括性答案提供民情脈絡，提醒民意不應被扁平處理。

► 公眾教育：建構理性討論的基礎

11月美國大選，四年一度的選舉再次令選舉民調備受關注。美國民調機構在上兩屆選舉低估特朗普選情，其後不斷進行技術調整，今次的封關民調顯示共和黨特朗普與民主黨賀錦麗的選情咬緊，最終卻由特朗普大勝。於是，民調是否再度失準再次成為討論焦點，但更重要的是我們應該怎樣理解民調數字、怎樣評估民調的可信度。藉著美國大選的契機，香港民研撰寫了兩篇「科普文章」，嘗試用淺白語言將民調知識、國際視野帶入公眾討論。來年，我們會積極推動民調科普，亦歡迎大眾向我們建議題目。

► 網站重整：搭建民調知識的平台

香港民研過去半年間一直進行網站重整，希望提供數據下載的便利，令民調數字能為大眾所用。另一方面，亦都為配合民調教育工作，以及即將推出的客席專欄，提供網上交流平台。在這個平台之上，我們設有會員專區，將會提供民調知識、數據分析、評論影片。網站終於在日前面世，現為公開測試階段，2025年1月將會正式啟用。

► 二〇二五見

香港民研在過去這一年作出了很多重大的嘗試，甚或說改變，這些決定無疑是為了回應不斷變化中的香港社會。在資源萎縮的情況下，我們選擇繼續進行有限度的自資民調，著力於讓人看見民調的社會價值。2024年，「變」的可能是民調頻率與形式，「不變」的是我們相信民調價值。2025年，希望大家繼續支持香港民研。

（香港民研編輯部）

‍轉載文章時請註明出處為「香港民意研究所」

2024 marks the fifth year since HKPORI became independent from the university. This year, beyond advancing public opinion research in Hong Kong, we decided to reposition ourselves, focusing on addressing social issues and developing public education related to opinion polling.

► Topical Studies: Using Data to Address Social Issues

In 2024, HKPORI conducted four topical studies, covering waste charging, fertility intentions, carer support policies, and subdivided units regulations. These studies, initiated by HKPORI, aimed to address ongoing societal discussions.

Our October study on fertility intentions was the first topical project following our repositioning. By examining Hongkongers’ considerations regarding childbirth, we sought to broaden the discussion to include social culture, housing issues, and the education system, all based on empirical data.

In April, our poll on waste charging revealed that public opposition was mainly due to the policy’s implementation timeline. Deliberative polling further suggested that after rational discussion, more citizens supported the concept of waste charging. Therefore, the policy’s failure should not be attributed to public rejection of the idea itself.

In November, we conducted another deliberative poll on carer support policies. The results indicated that after understanding the policies and carers’ experiences, more citizens found the current policies ineffective in assisting carers. Using polling data, HKPORI estimated the carer population in Hong Kong, sparking public discourse on the definition of carer.

In December, in response to the government’s proposed “basic housing units” policy, we launched a poll on subdivided units regulations. The data is currently being analysed, and we look forward to sharing the results soon.

► Qualitative Analysis: Unpacking the Complexity of Public Opinion

In January, for the first time, HKPORI introduced open-ended questions in our online panel survey. These questions explored the reasons behind citizens’ support or opposition to the Chief Executive, as well as their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the government. The answers were visualised using word clouds to highlight the most frequently mentioned terms.

More recently, HKPORI examined public views on the government’s push for the “mega events economy”. Open-ended responses revealed that while citizens were most familiar with the “Night Vibes” initiative, many also expressed having no impression of the events. Among those who described their impressions, the most common term was “waste”.

Throughout the year, researchers actively conducted qualitative analyses of open-ended responses. Respondents often disclosed personal circumstances in their answers, with some providing detailed replies. These insights enriched the context of quantitative survey results, reminding us that public opinion should not be flattened.

► Public Education: Building the Foundation for Rational Discussion

The US presidential election in November once again brought election polling into the spotlight. After pollsters underestimated Trump’s performance in the last two elections, they made technical adjustments. This year’s final polls showed a close race between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris, but Trump ultimately won by a landslide. This reignited debates about the accuracy of polling.

More importantly, it raised questions about how we should interpret polling data and evaluate its credibility. Taking this opportunity, HKPORI published two “popular science” articles, using plain language to introduce polling knowledge and international perspectives into public discussions. Looking ahead, we will actively promote polling literacy and welcome suggestions from the public on future topics.

► Website Revamp: Building a Platform for Polling Knowledge

Over the past few months, HKPORI has been revamping our website to facilitate data downloads, making polling results more accessible to the public. Additionally, the revamped website supports our public education efforts and will feature guest columns for more open discussions.

The platform includes a members-only section, offering content such as polling knowledge, data analysis, and commentary videos. The new website has officially entered its public testing phase and will be fully launched in January 2025.

► See You in 2025

Over the past year, HKPORI has made significant efforts and even changes in response to Hong Kong’s evolving society. Despite the shrinking resources, we chose to continue conducting self-funded polls on a limited basis, striving to highlight the social value of polling.

In 2024, what may have changed are the frequency and formats of our polls. What remained unchanged is our belief in the value of polling. We hope you will continue to support HKPORI in 2025.

When sharing article, please indicate the source as “Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute”

2024-09-07

世界民意研究學會（WAPOR）每年舉辦周年大會，數以百計來自不同國家的民意研究學者，聚焦探討民意研究的國際發展。香港民研主席及行政總裁鍾庭耀，今年除了作為 WAPOR 會長出席這個年度盛事，更是作為香港人參與其中。他坦言，在七月出席會議期間，來自其他地方的同業會私下問到：香港還有空間做民調嗎？

► 國際社會看見的香港

香港在 2012 年曾經主辦 WAPOR 年會，是首個位處亞洲的年會東道主。12 年過去，鍾庭耀前往首爾出席第 77 屆 WAPOR 年會，他自身的遭遇以至香港的現況，成為了各地民意研究者關心的部分。

鍾庭耀綜合四日會期的觀察說：「12 年前來過香港的，會想現在再來香港會否有些不一樣了？自由空間收窄了？現在才認識香港的，從媒體報導見到很多東西都退步了，但他們心情上是半信半疑。」

鍾庭耀表示，遇到這些疑慮都會給予正向回應，形容在香港做民調仍然自由，但也不得不承認城市的活力、經濟有所倒退。至於民調工作的制肘，有哪些議題可能會觸及「紅線」，媒體都有報道，自不用說。

► 香港之於國際社會

作為在國際組織出任要職的香港人，比起述說「香港」，鍾庭耀更希望的是透過行事方式展現香港人特質。他上任會長逾一年半，積極推動民意研究的國際發展，勤力程度嚇壞了 WAPOR 的同事，但見到會員人數屢創新高、機構受國際社會認可，同事也開始適應這種工作節奏。

「香港人以香港過去的國際經驗，以及我們的教育背景，其實對國際社會很有貢獻、可以很有幫助，我希望傳遞到這樣的訊息。」鍾庭耀說，香港的優勢在於融會貫通，是一座具有國際視野的城市，普世價值也應是香港持守的價值，也只有這樣，香港才仍會是世界的香港。

► 科學家的信仰

從事民意研究接近 40 年，鍾庭耀總結民意研究的核心價值，認為最重要的是 humanity（人文精神），強調民意研究的服務對象是 humankind（人類）。回顧過去推進香港、WAPOR 以至人類歷史發展的工作，他發現自己熱切盼望著一個跨越國界的世界，儘管那在旁人看來近乎信仰。
（香港民研編輯部）

‍轉載文章時請註明出處為「香港民意研究所」

The World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) holds a conference annually, gathering hundreds of public opinion researchers from different countries to focus on the international development of public opinion research.This year, President and CEO of HKPORI Robert Chung attended the event both as the President of WAPOR and as a HongKonger. He admitted that during the conference in July, researchers from other places often asked him privately: Is there still space for polling in Hong Kong?

► Hong Kong in the Eyes of the International Community

In 2012, Hong Kong hosted the WAPOR annual conference, the first in Asia. Twelve years later, Chung attended the 77th WAPOR annual conference in Seoul. His personal experiences and the current situation in Hong Kong became areas of interest for researchers worldwide.

Chung observed over the four-day event, “Those who visited Hong Kong 12 years ago might wonder if Hong Kong is different now. Has freedom narrowed? Those who know Hong Kong recently just now have read negative media reports, but they are not too sure.”

Chung responds positively to such concerns, describing polling in Hong Kong as still free, though he acknowledges the city’s vitality and economy have declined. Regarding restrictions in polling, certain topics may touch the “red line,” which is already obvious in the media reports.

► Hong Kong’s Role in the International Community

As a HongKonger in an influential international position, Chung aims to showcase the qualities of Hong Kong people through his actions rather than just explanation. Over his year and a half as the President, he has actively promoted the international development of public opinion research. His diligence astonished WAPOR colleagues, but the growing membership and recognition by the international community have helped them adapt to this work pace.

“Hong Kong’s past international experience and our educational background contribute significantly to the international community,” Chung said, it is the message he hopes to convey. Hong Kong’s strength lies in its global perspective, and universal values should be the city’s guiding principles; only then will Hong Kong remain a part of the world.

► A Scientist’s Belief

With nearly 40 years in public opinion research, Chung concludes that the core value of this field is humanity, emphasising that public opinion research serves humankind. Reflecting on his efforts to advance the development of Hong Kong, WAPOR, and even human history, he found himself eagerly looking forward to a world that transcends borders, though it may seem more like a faith to many others.
(HKPORI’s Editorial)

‍When sharing article, please indicate the source as “Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute”

2024-08-31

香港民研主席及行政總裁鍾庭耀，同時出任世界民意研究學會（WAPOR）會長。他在本年度的WAPOR周年大會主持最後一天的圓桌會議，探討民意研究如何盛載人文精神，是三個主題活動（Keynote Events）之一。

今屆周年大會的主題——民意研究的靈魂：自由權利（liberty）、專業素養（quality）、人文精神（humanity），延續鍾庭耀兩年前在WAPOR第75屆周年大會上的講辭。「75周年，是時候做一個歷史總結。我個人覺得，民意研究有三個核心價值：liberty、 quality、humanity，最核心的是humanity。」鍾庭耀說。

► 發布民調的自由　聲音被聽見的權利

周年大會上，一位主題講者首先就自由權利發表主題演講，討論為何及如何保護民調的自由。講者指出，民調的作用在於讓人們的聲音被聽見，而WAPOR自1984年發布《自由報告》，調查世界各地進行及發布民調的自由程度，指出這是WAPOR保護民調自由的一種方式。2023年的調查發現，由政府組織管制選舉民調的國家佔36%，比由專業組織管制（30%）更高，情況在非洲、拉丁美洲更為明顯。

另一位主題講者就「專業素養」作主題演講，較聚焦在民意調查的技術層面。講者強調民調質素之重要，在於量度真實的數值，指出高質素的量度方式應該是準確的、可信的、有效的，以至國際間的研究可以相互比對。

► 民意研究的人文精神　民意研究者的夙願

四日會期的最後一天，鍾庭耀主持圓桌會議。他表示：「若自由權利提醒我們所有人有被聽見的權利，而專業素養敦促我們在服務他人時採用最高標準，那麼人文精神必然為我們堅持自由和專業提供最終目的。」他們在席間談及民意研究如何緩解人類衝突、數據收集及存檔與人文精神的關係，以至表演藝術如何與民意研究相結合。

鍾庭耀相信，人文精神是民意研究最核心的一環。關於為何強調人文精神，他有一個沒有寫在WAPOR文件的原因：「我作為香港人參與WAPOR的工作，前前後後都20多年，現在擔任會長，適值香港自由的發展⋯⋯呈下降軌跡，我覺得香港人或者香港文化的出路，就是繼續維持我們的國際化。」作為扎根於香港的民意研究者，他希望與國際間的研究者共同努力，服務人類（humankind，鍾強調，這個字裏有hk）。
（香港民研編輯部）

‍轉載文章時請註明出處為「香港民意研究所」

Robert Chung, President and CEO of HKPORI, also serves as President of the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR). He chaired the final day’s roundtable discussion at this year’s WAPOR annual conference, exploring how public opinion research embodies humanistic values. It was one of the three keynote events of the conference.

The theme of this year’s conference—The Soul of Public Opinion Research: Liberty, Quality, Humanity—builds on Chung’s speech at WAPOR’s 75th Annual Conference two years ago. “Seventy-five years on, it’s time for a historical review. Personally, I believe public opinion research has three core values: liberty, quality, humanity, with humanity being the most critical,” Chung remarked.

► Freedom to Publish Polls, The Right to Be Heard

At the conference, a keynote speaker addressed the topic of liberty, discussing why and how the freedom to conduct and publish polls should be protected. The speaker pointed out that the role of polls is to ensure people’s voices are heard. Since 1984, WAPOR has been issuing the “Freedom Report,” examining the degree of freedom in conducting and publishing polls worldwide. The 2023 survey found that 36% of countries have government bodies regulating election polls, compared to 30% regulated by professional organisations, and the situation was more pronounced in Africa and Latin America.

Another keynote speaker talked about “quality,” concentrating on the technical aspects of public opinion polling. The speaker emphasised the importance of high-quality polls in measuring true values, noting that quality measures should be accurate, reliable, and valid, allowing for international comparisons.

►The Humanistic Spirit of Public Opinion Research: The Aspiration of Researchers

On the final day of the four-day conference, Chung led a roundtable discussion. He stated, “If Liberty reminds us of all people’s right to be heard, and Quality urges all of us to adopt the highest standards when serving the people, then Humanity must have provided us with the ultimate purpose for upholding Liberty and Quality.” They discussed how opinion research could alleviate human conflict, the relationship between data collection and archiving with humanistic values, and how performing arts might integrate with public opinion research.

Chung believes that the humanistic spirit is the core of public opinion research. Regarding why he emphasises humanity, he shared a reason not explained in WAPOR: “As a HongKonger participating in WAPOR’s work for over 20 years, now as President, coinciding with Hong Kong’s declining trajectory of freedom… I feel the way forward for the people and culture of Hong Kong people is to maintain our international outlook.” As a public opinion researcher rooted in Hong Kong, he hopes to work together with international researchers to serve humankind.
(HKPORI’s Editorial)

‍When sharing article, please indicate the source as “Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute”

2024-08-24

世界民意研究學會（學會）上月底在韓國首爾舉行周年大會，但其實12年前，學會的周年大會首次踏出歐美地區，香港便代表亞洲成為第一個歐美以外的年會東道主。成就解鎖不是偶然，除了考慮到香港作為國際都市的獨特性，更重要的是香港民意研究一路以來的發展，累積了足夠的歷史厚度與研究深度。

► 歷史的開端：1991年已有輿論壓力

香港首個學術民意研究機構成立於1991年6月—— 香港大學民意研究計劃（港大民研），由鍾庭耀擔任研究主任。同年，港英政府舉行首次地區直選立法局選舉，民意調查由此進場。鍾庭耀憶述：「當時已經有輿論，懷疑民意調查是為政黨造勢。」民調顯示民主派候選人領先，而9月份選舉結果揭盅，民主派贏得差不多所有直選議席。民意調查作為一種科學工具，開始被公眾看見；同時，民意調查開始被政府重視。這是香港民調發展的開端。

當年，史丹福大學與香港大學合作，為港澳民意研究者提供工作坊，澳門最終於2011年就修改《出版法》和《視聽廣播法》進行慎思民調，澳方稱為商議式民調，結果決定暫緩廣播法立法。然而，不能忽視的是民調過程中派發的平衡簡介資料，到底是否有助公眾公平地理解法案，也曾受到質疑。至於香港，由於未曾出現過慎思民調，方法學的討論也無從談起。

► 歷史的走向

香港的民意研究，過去三十多年經歷過許多挑戰，可以預示未來的難關將會更多。然而，望向國際社會，香港的學者在世界民意研究學會出任會長、在周年大會繼續發表關於香港民調的研究、民意研究機構繼續推動前沿的研究方法，未來仍然是值得期待的。
（香港民研編輯部）

‍轉載文章時請註明出處為「香港民意研究所」

The World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) held its annual conference in Seoul last month. Twelve years ago, Hong Kong was the first Asian host, marking a significant milestone due to its unique international status. More importantly, it was a recognition of the historical depth and research development of public opinion research in Hong Kong.

► The Beginning: Pressure Built up on Day One in 1991

Hong Kong’s first academic public opinion research institution, the Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP), was established in June 1991, led by Robert Chung. That same year, the British Hong Kong government held its first direct elections for the Legislative Council. Public opinion polls began then. Chung recalls, “There were already people saying that opinion polling was part of election engineering.” The polls showed democrats leading, and they won almost all the direct-elected seats in September. Public opinion polls, as a scientific tool, gained visibility and caught the government’s attention. This marked the start of Hong Kong’s polling development.

By 2000, during the “HKU Polling Incident,” polls were deeply embroiled in political controversy. Following the incident, HKU’s Council formed an independent committee which confirmed that government pressure on HKUPOP constituted an infringement on academic freedom. HKUPOP’s work continued. Polls continued to reflect social conditions, with polling institutions mirroring another side of societal reality. In July 2019, HKUPOP spun off from HKU with Robert Chung’s retirement, forming today’s Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (HKPORI).

► A Historical Regret: Unfulfilled Deliberative Polling

Robert Chung reflects on the development of Hong Kong’s polling and the unfulfilled dream of Deliberative Polling. Proposed by a Stanford professor, this method involves randomly sampled citizens receiving balanced briefing materials and engaging in discussions with experts or political leaders held by neutral moderators, directly influencing government policies.

Stanford worked with HKU to provide workshops for Hong Kong and Macau researchers. In 2011, Macau conducted deliberative polling on amendments to the Publishing Law and Broadcasting Law, resulting in delaying the latter. However, the fairness of the balanced materials provided was questioned. In Hong Kong, deliberative polling never happened, leaving methodological discussions unexplored.

► History in the Future

Over the past 30 years, Hong Kong’s public opinion research has faced many challenges, with more expected in the future. Yet, internationally, Hong Kong scholars hold positions in WAPOR, present research on Hong Kong polls at annual conferences, and push forward cutting-edge research methods. The future remains promising.
(HKPORI’s Editorial)

‍When sharing article, please indicate the source as “Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute”

2024-08-17

世界民意研究學會（學會）上月底在韓國首爾結束第77屆周年大會。成立於二戰後的學會，迄今走過了四分三個世紀，今年的主題回歸民意研究的本質：Liberty（自由權利）、Quality（專業素養）及 Humanity（人文精神）。會議上，來自世界各地的幾百位民意研究者聚首討論民意調查現今的角色與作用，以及如何利用創新的方法，分析解讀民調，讓人們的聲音被聽見（let people’s voice be heard）。

► 香港與盛事的距離

這樣的盛事曾經也出現在香港。2012年，香港民意研究所尚未從香港大學獨立，世界民意研究學會首次踏出歐美，選址香港大學舉辦第65屆周年大會。時任港大民研總監鍾庭耀記得，當時學會內部討論經年才有了選址香港的決定，是開拓亞洲民意研究發展重要的一步。他形容：「12年前是歷史的突破，是WAPOR（學會）的突破。」各國人員到埗，從語言、交通以至飲食，都能體會到香港作為國際都會的獨特性。

12年過去，香港還能再次主辦周年大會嗎？現為香港民意研究所主席及行政總裁的鍾庭耀思考著。他認為，香港的自由空間比12年前萎縮，觸碰到某些議題會引來政府部門的「勸喻」，但民意調查仍然有生存空間。他續舉例說，選舉民調並沒有發布限制，票站民調仍然可以經申請後進行。事實上，世界民意研究學會兩年前在杜拜舉行周年大會，聚焦檢視民意研究在戰後的發展。鍾當時出任學會副主席，表示大會選址在杜拜舉行時，也曾考慮當地政府對民研的開放程度。

► 香港在世界的角色　民調在世界的作用

今屆周年大會移師韓國首爾，香港的民意研究並未缺席。在眾多論文報告的環節中，有香港學者與來自不同國家的學者專家，一同研究香港、法國、卡塔爾、科威特、印度、墨西哥不同級別的選舉，共同研究影響選民投票行為的因素。

現任學會會長鍾庭耀則在會期最後一天主持圓桌會議，關注民意研究如何盛載人文精神。席間還有創作劇場表演「100%香港」的德國和香港藝術家，講述「100% City」的概念，如何將民調搬到舞台，將數字還原為生命。鍾庭耀最後總結，指出民意研究無非是為人類（humankind）服務。

持守民意研究的核心價值，在政治形勢複雜多變、科技發展日新月異的環境下顯得日益重要。民意研究者認為，讓人們的聲音被聽見，民意研究將能用於解決紛爭。誠如誕生於1947年的學會，作為二戰後成立的多個國際組織之一，是人類為了尋求世界大戰不再爆發的一個嘗試，其所體現的人文精神貫穿歷史。

‍轉載文章時請註明出處為「香港民意研究所」

At the end of last month, the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) concluded its 77th annual conference in Seoul, South Korea. Founded after World War II, the association has been in existence for three quarters of a century. This year’s theme returned to the essence of public opinion research: Liberty, Quality, and Humanity. Hundreds of public opinion researchers from around the world gathered to discuss the current role and impact of opinion polls and how to use innovative methods to interpret them, to let people’s voices be heard.

► The Distance Between Hong Kong and Mega Events

Such mega events have also taken place in Hong Kong. In 2012, when the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (HKPORI) was still part of The University of Hong Kong, WAPOR held its 65th annual conference there, marking its first outside Europe and America. Robert Chung, then Director of the HKU Public Opinion Programme, recalls that the decision to choose Hong Kong followed years of internal discussion, marking a significant step in developing public opinion research in Asia. He described it as a historic breakthrough for WAPOR and Hong Kong, showcasing the city’s uniqueness as an international metropolis through language, transport, and cuisine.

12 years have gone by, can Hong Kong host the annual conference again? Chung, now President and CEO of HKPORI, ponders this. He believes Hong Kong’s freedom has shrunk compared to 12 years ago, leading to government “advice” when touching on certain topics. However, there’s still space for public opinion polls to exist. For instance, publication of election polls are not restricted, and exit polls can still be conducted upon proper application. As a matter of fact, WAPOR held its annual conference in Dubai two years ago, focused on examining the post-war development of public opinion research. Chung, then Vice President of WAPOR, said WAPOR has also considered the local government’s level of openness when it chose Dubai as the conference location.

► Hong Kong’s Role in the World, The Role of Polls Globally

At this year’s conference in Seoul, Hong Kong’s public opinion research was still present. Among the many presentation sessions, scholars from Hong Kong and other countries studied together the elections in Hong Kong, France, Qatar, Kuwait, India, and Mexico, exploring factors influencing voter behaviour.

Chung, now WAPOR president, chaired a roundtable on the last day, focusing on how public opinion research embodies humanity. The session invited German and Hong Kong artists who created the theatre production “100% Hong Kong”, presented the concept of “100% City”, and how they bring polls to the stage and transform numbers into life. Chung concluded by stating that public opinion research ultimately serves humankind.

Upholding the core values of public opinion research is increasingly important amid the complex political situations and rapid technological advancements. Researchers believe that by letting people’s voices be heard, public opinion research can help resolve conflicts. Founded in 1947, WAPOR is one of many international organisations established after World War II, embodying the human spirit throughout history in the quest to prevent future conflicts.

‍When sharing article, please indicate the source as “Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute”

2023-01-31

……感謝各位會員在兩年前投票選我擔任這個職務！我會鞠躬盡瘁、不遺餘力地去履行我的職責，但我亦同時需要你們每個人的支持。

擔任這個職務是一個真正的挑戰！整個世界都在面對前所未有的挑戰。對世界民研學會來說，我們着力的，依然是可以如何以專業誠信和質素去貢獻全人類。

在杜拜舉行的75週年會議上，我們有寶貴的機會回顧自己的歷史，然後邁向另一個75年。知識的增長不是一條直線，但願我們可以在未來25年取得的成就，比我們在過去75年得到的還要多！

在尋找自我的過程中，我總結出民研學會的三個核心價值，就是自由、素質和人性。我在杜拜這樣解釋：自由是要讓人民的聲音得到聆聽，是就人民的想法進行和發表科學研究的權利。素質就是科學方法的應用，專業標準的發展，和讓不同界別的代表和專家發展有關技術。人性，就是用來指導我們如何運用知識來減輕災害和衝突，以達致人類的最高共同利益。推動人性，應該是我們的最終目標。我認為這三個核心價值對我們整個民研群體，不論是在「中央」、「地區」、還是「個人」層面都同樣重要。

未來兩年，我將會是世界民研群體的頭號僕人。我懇請各位繼續支援我和世界民研學會，讓我們秉持信念，服務全人類。

世界民研學會不應是一個受地理、種族、文化或認知限制的組織。在過去75年，我們在概念、方法、專業和跨文化研究等領域都取得非常成功的發展。我們會珍惜這些成就，但我們亦會同時開闢新的天地，比如引用先進的科技、打破不同科學之間的隔膜、甚至把科學和藝術結合起來。在組織的層面，我們會與世界上不同的專業團體、世界民研的地區分會、以及我們的地區代表緊密合作，凝聚會員，發揮我們的專業力量。世界民研會在不同領域和範疇推動多元化和下而上的積極發展，而非側重於同質性和上而下的運作模式。

畢竟，我們的共同使命，是要讓人民的聲音得到聆聽。為此，人民不應被分割，而我們也不應自我分割。我期待有一天，可以看到一個只有人性而沒有疆域的世界。在未來100天，我會努力諮詢各位，凝聚力量，好讓我們可以一起建設一個更加美好的世界。

連結：https://wapor.org/世界民意研究學會兩位會長的話-2023年1月/?lang=zh-hant

……thank you fellow members for electing me to this position two years ago! I will do my best to fulfil my duties, but I will need help from every one of you!

Taking up this position is a real challenge! The whole world is facing unprecedented problems on all fronts. To us in WAPOR, our primary concern shall remain to be professional integrity and quality for the wellbeing of humankind.

In our 75th Anniversary Conference in Dubai, we had the precious opportunity of reviewing our own history, and then ventured into the next 75 years and beyond. Knowledge growth is not linear, so let us aim at achieving more in the next 25 years compared to what we have already achieved over the past 75 years!

In my own soul-searching exercise, I have concluded that there are three core values for WAPOR, namely, Liberty, Quality and Humanity. I explained them in Dubai: Liberty is the right to let people’s voice be heard, it is the right to conduct and publish scientific research on what people think. Quality is the application of scientific methods, the development of professional standards, research techniques among professionals and representatives across different disciplines. Humanity guides us to apply our knowledge to mitigate disasters and conflicts, to promote the common good of humankind. Enhancing Humanity should be our ultimate goal. I consider these three core values to be equally important to our entire WAPOR community, whether at the “central”, “regional” or “individual” level.

In the two years ahead of me, I shall be the number one servant of the WAPOR community. I now appeal to each and every one of you for your continued support of me and WAPOR, so that we can work together to serve humankind based on the core values we believe in.

WAPOR shall not be an organization limited by boundaries, whether geographical, ethnical, cultural, or epistemological. Over the past 75 years, we have developed very successfully in areas of conceptual, methodological, professional, and cross-cultural studies. We shall treasure our achievements, but we shall also break new ground, like the application of advanced technologies, the breaking of barriers between different sciences, and even the integration of science and art. In terms of organization, we shall work closely with our sister organizations around the world, our own regional chapters and country representatives who will be our link with the general membership. We shall promote diversification and bottom-up initiatives in different areas and domains of WAPOR development, rather than homogeneity and top-down directives.

Our common mission, after all, is to let the voice of the people be heard. For this purpose, people should not be divided, and we ourselves should not be divided. I personally look forward to seeing a borderless world united by a common humanity, one day, and I will use the next 100 days to be a period of intensive consultation and consolidation. Let us work together for a better world!

Link: https://wapor.org/letter-from-two-wapor-presidents-january-2023/

2022-12-11

毛澤東功過七三開，這是鄧小平在1980年說的。鄧小平功過也是七三開，這是民研團隊在1997年2月的民調總結。江澤民功過幾多開，香港民研沒有數據了。

1997年2月，民研團隊總結了香港市民對近代中國領導人的功過評價，包括鄧小平、周恩來、毛澤東和蔣介石，數據包括1995年、1996和1997年，之後沒有再做調查了。是否一個損失？要由歷史學家評價了。

蓋棺是否需要定論？是史學家的問題，但定論有何根據？民意研究應有一定作用。不過，歷史不斷有人改寫，民意亦在不斷改變，什麼時候最為合適？什麼理據最為中肯？可能也不容易回答。

嬴政作古超過二千年，功過定論仍然反反覆覆。科學家最近公布，從格陵蘭永凍層採集的DNA樣本，可以追溯至200萬年前。他們其實在16年前已經找到樣本，但當時的科技未夠先進，所以要儲存到現在，才開始解封研究。

香港民研也是一樣。條件未成熟，風險未解除，我們也無需急於為任何研究下定論。我們會盡量保存數據，猶如科學家保存DNA一樣，為未來的科學研究打好基礎。

Mao Zedong’s merits and demerits were split 70-30, according to Deng Xiaoping in 1980. Deng Xiaoping’s own split was also 70-30, according to surveys conducted by the POP Team in February 1997. We do not have any data on Jiang Zemin.

In February 1997, the POP Team summarized Hong Kong people’s appraisal of the merits and faults of modern Chinese leaders, including Deng Xiaoping, Zhou Enlai, Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai Shek, with figures obtained in 1995, 1996 and 1997. Now we don’t have any. Is it a loss? We leave it to the historians.

Do we need these conclusions? This is a question for historians, but for the basis of such conclusions, opinion researchers may be able to help. However, history is constantly being rewritten, and public opinion is always on the change, so the questions of when is the best time and what is the best conclusion cannot be easily answered.

China’s first emperor has died for more than 2,000 years, the appraisal of his rule is still inconclusive. Scientists recently announced that DNA samples collected from Greenland permafrost can be traced back to 2 million years ago. They had the samples 16 years ago, but could only wait until now for technology to advance.

The same is true for our team. The conditions are not yet mature and the risk is not yet released, there is no rush to conclude any research. We will preserve the data as much as we can, just like scientists preserving their DNA samples, in order to facilitate future research.

回應傳媒及公眾查詢

2025-02-14

編者按：香港民研在2023年2月13日發出「有關香港民意研究所未來發展之聲明」後，收到眾多傳媒查詢，民研已經逐個回覆。但在答覆前，民研都預先說明，自從2022年4月開始，民研會在回應傳媒及公眾查詢後，透過網站的發佈有關查詢的問與答，以提升透明度及推動公民教育。民研今日發放以下的問答整合，就是基於以上理解。

‍

問題（經簡化及修改）

Q1：香港民研最新發展的決定是否跟日前國安處找鍾庭耀博士及香港民研協助調查有關？

A1：香港民研近年不斷根據以下一籃子六個因素評估發展空間和方向：市民興趣、研究價值、成本效益、會員意見、歷史價值、法律風險。國安處調查絕對是我們最新的發展中一個非常重要的因素，導致法律風險和成本效益現在明顯變得非常重要，後者包括重新調配人手和添置被警方檢走的所有伺服器和電子設備。

A2：有關受委託的項目，研究所會不會再開展／接洽新項目？

Q2：只要項目是符合法律要求和專業守則，兼且通過我們的內部評核和風險評估，我們會繼續以最專業和科學的方法服務社會。

A3：有關香港民研的會員，現時有多少會員？研究所會否停收會員月費？

Q3：我們現時的會員數目大約是150。由於我們尚未停止營運，所有會員制度和福利都沒有改變。

From the Editor: After HKPORI released its “Statement on the Future Development of HKPORI” on February 13, 2025, it has received a large number of media enquiries. Before answering each of them, HKPORI alerted the media of its general practice since April 2022, that it might share all such enquiries at its website for the purpose of transparency and civic education. The questions and answers edited and published are based on this understanding.

‍

Questions (simplified and sub-edited):

‍Q1: Are the decisions of HKPORI’s latest development related to the recent national security investigations concerning Dr Robert Chung and HKPORI?

A1: HKPORI has been using a basket of 6 factors to evaluate our operation and prospective development, namely, expressed interest in society, research value, cost-effectiveness, HKPORI Members’ opinion, historical value, and legal risk. The recent national security investigation definitely played a very important factor in our latest development, as it made legal risk and cost-effectiveness become significantly more important. The latter factor includes the re-deployment of manpower and the replacement of all computer servers and electronic devices seized by the Police.

A2: Regarding commissioned research projects, will the Institute start/discuss new projects with clients?

Q2: As long as a project complies with the law, meets the professional standards, passes through our ethical and risk assessments, we will continue to serve the society in the most professional and scientific way.

A3: Regarding the membership of HKPORI, what is the current membership size? Will HKPORI stop charging monthly membership fee?

Q3: HKPORI currently has about 150 members. Since we continue to operate, our membership system and benefits remain unchanged.

2024-12-28

問題（經簡化及修改）

‍Q1：鍾劍華目前與香港民研的關係是什麼？

A1：鍾劍華博士於 2020 年 5 月 1 日至 2022 年 4 月 30 日期間，受聘為香港民意研究所副行政總裁。合約期滿後，鍾劍華離開香港民研。香港民研主席及行政總裁鍾庭耀表示，鍾劍華與研究所之間已經沒有任何關係，亦很久沒有聯絡。作為他的朋友和舊同事，鍾庭耀對他在香港社會政策研究方面的貢獻，仍然心存感激。

鍾庭耀在 2022 年 4 月 26 日關於鍾劍華離職的聲明指：「民研主席及行政總裁鍾庭耀在此感謝鍾劍華對研究所的貢獻，兼且感謝社會各界對研究所未來發展的關注。鍾庭耀謹此公告：香港民研運作一切正常，繼續奉公守法。遇上任何執法部門提問或查詢，民研都會盡量配合。」聲明至今仍然適用。

Q2：警方國安處有否針對香港民研作出任何行動？

A2：國安處沒有搜查或聯絡民研，鍾庭耀相信國安處對鍾劍華的指控與研究所無關。

Q3：鍾劍華被通緝一事對香港民研的運作有何影響？

A3：鍾庭耀強調，香港民研的研究工作完全不受事件影響。他並指，法律風險是香港民研考慮研究方向的六個因素之一，但並非最重要的一個。

Questions (simplified and sub-edited)

‍Q1: What is Dr Chung Kim-wah’s current relationship with HKPORI?

A1: Dr Chung Kim-wah was employed as the Deputy CEO of HKPORI from 1 May 2020 to 30 April 2022. Upon the expiry of his contract, Dr KW Chung left HKPORI. President and CEO of HKPORI, Dr Robert Chung, stated that there is no longer any relationship between Dr KW Chung and the Institute, and the two of them have not been in contact for a long time. As a friend and former colleague, Robert Chung remains grateful for KW Chung’s contributions to social policy research in Hong Kong.

In the statement dated 26 April 2022 regarding Dr Chung’s departure, Robert Chung said: “The President and Chief Executive Officer of HKPORI Robert Chung would like to thank Chung Kim-wah for his contributions to the Institute, he also thanks the public for caring so much about its development. Robert Chung announces that HKPORI is operating normally, and continues to comply with the law. HKPORI will cooperate with all law enforcement units as much as possible in case they conduct any investigation.” This statement remains valid today.

Q2: Has the police’s National Security Department (NSD) taken any action against HKPORI?

A2: NSD has not conducted any search or made any contact with HKPORI. Robert Chung believes the charges against Dr Chung Kim-wah by NSD are unrelated to the Institute.

Q3: What impact has the warrant for Dr Chung Kim-wah had on HKPORI’s operations?

A3: Robert Chung emphasised that the Institute’s research work has not been affected by the incident at all. He also noted that legal risk is only one of the six factors affecting the direction of HKPORI’s research, it is not the most important factor.

2024-02-28

問題（經簡化及修改）

‍Q1：香港民研過去及現在有否收取海外資金或捐款作為營運經費？在23條立法後，會否避免收取海外資金或捐款？

Q2：香港民研過去及現在有否與外國或國際機構合作？在23條立法後，會否避免與外國或國際機構合作？

Q3：就政府建議引入的「境外干預罪」，會否擔心香港民研的研究及調查項目被指觸犯有關法例？香港民研的營運會否因應23條立法作出改變？

‍香港民研回覆

‍A1：香港民研從來沒有收取海外政治獻金，故此23條立法對我們應該沒有影響。研究隊在香港大學工作的時候，我們完全遵守大學的財務指引和行政規條，所有運作都公開透明，與海外機構合作的研究項目，亦一律在研究報告中仔細說明。我們不會改變這個行之有效的做法。

A2：香港民研一向奉公守法，所有與國際機構合作的項目，都會在法律框架內進行，以前如是，以後也會如是。我們認為，香港應該繼續保持甚至加強自己的國際地位，這是服務社會、國家、民族和全世界的最好方法。眼前的困境，是基於多種歷史、文化、政治和社會原因，情況總會改變。自絕與國際社會的合作，將難以由治及興。

A3：香港民研會以最負責任的態度，避免觸犯法律法例。我們會小心審視法庭案例和專家意見，訂立更多內部守則和管理系統，避免觸碰紅線。我們期待，政府部門和法律專家設立具公信力的免費諮詢服務，為市民提供可靠的法律意見。我們更加期待，有關部門以科學方法蒐集更多真實的民意數據，了解市民的真正憂慮。

Questions (simplified and sub-edited)

‍Q1: Has HKPORI received overseas fund or donation in the past or now for operating expenses? Will HKPORI avoid receiving overseas fund or donation after the Article 23 legislation?

Q2: Has HKPORI cooperated with foreign or international organizations in the past or now? Will HKPORI avoid cooperating with foreign or international organizations after the Article 23 legislation?

Q3: Regarding the government’s proposal on introducing a crime under external interference, will HKPORI worry that its research projects and survey items will be accused of violating relevant laws?

‍Replies from HKPORI

‍A1: HKPORI has never received any overseas political donation, so we are unlikely to be affected by the Article 23 legislation. When the research team worked in The University of Hong Kong, we strictly followed the financial and administrative regulations of the University, while keeping all operations open and transparent to the public. Whenever we work with foreign organizations, we always explain them clearly in our research reports. We will not change this practice.

A2: HKPORI has always complied with the law in the most responsible way. All our international projects have been conducted within the legal framework, and this practice will remain unchanged. We believe that Hong Kong should maintain and even strengthen its international status, because this is the best way to serve our society, our country, our race and the world. The hardship we are facing has stemmed from a variety of historical, cultural, political and societal reasons, and they will change. It we cut our connection with the world, the transition from stability to prosperity (由治及興) will be hard to come by.

A3: HKPORI will act most prudently to avoid violating the law. We will carefully review all relevant court cases and expert opinions, and avoid hitting the red lines by establishing more internal rules and management checks. We wish government departments and legal experts would establish free and credible consultation services to provide people with reliable legal advice. We are even more eager to see the government collect and collate public opinion in a scientific way, in order to under people’s real concern and truthful opinion.

2023-12-12

問題（經過簡化及修改）

‍皮尤研究中心於2023年12月4日發表一項關於香港人身份認同及香港現況議題的民意調查結果，作為「東亞宗教」調查系列之一部分，而此調查系列旨在研究宗教轉變對全球各社群的影響。有關香港調查在2023年6至9月進行，並以隨機電話抽樣方式訪問了2,012名18歲以上的受訪者。

Q1：香港民研對外間調查機構接手研究港人身份認同有何感受，以及如何分析當中結果？

Q2：皮尤在構思及實際進行調查時有否與香港民研以任何形式合作？

‍香港民研回覆

‍A1：香港民研歡迎所有本地及非本地專業機構於香港進行任何民意研究，因為擁有愈多科學數據對社會發展愈有幫助。事實上，香港民研仍會繼續進行身份認同感調查，每半年一次，只不過是由年初開始，停止免費發放有關調查結果及數據而已。任何研究人士其實可從「香港民研數據查冊平台」下載相關數據（包括免費及付費項目），與皮尤調查結果互讀。我們留意到皮尤研究身份認同的調查字眼與香港民研有所不同，因此，即使他們的調查結果能為國際學術研究作出一定貢獻，也未能取代香港民研就相同議題自1997年起所作的系統性研究。香港民研確信可在國際民研領域手執牛耳，可惜香港社會在民研自由和專業的領域正在倒退，極之可惜。公眾人士可瀏覽pori.hk免費查閱香港民研於2023年7月前所進行有關香港人身份認同調查之數據。至於身份認同調查在2023年7月後的數據已上載至「香港民研數據查冊平台」，供各界徵購。

A2：香港民研沒有參與上述研究。然而，民研與皮尤一直維持友好關係。香港民研主席兼行政總裁鍾庭耀現正擔任世界民意研究學會主席，他致力於國際領域推廣自由及專業的民意研究。香港民研對有關國際合作保持開放態度。

Questions (simplified and sub-edited)

‍Pew Research Center published a survey on Hong Kong people’s ethnic identity on December 4, 2023 as a part of its Pew-Templeton Global Religious Futures Project, which analyses religious change and its impact on societies around the world. The Center surveyed 2,012 adults in Hong Kong over the phone from June to September 2023.

Q1: How does HKPORI feel when other organizations took over ethnic identity surveys of Hong Kong people, and how would HKPORI analyse the findings?

Q2: Has Pew Research Center collaborated with HKPORI in this survey?

‍Replies from HKPORI

‍A1: HKPORI welcomes all professional organizations, local or non-local, to conduct any opinion research in Hong Kong. The more scientific data we have, the better. HKPORI is still conducting ethnic identity surveys regularly on a half-yearly basis, only that we no longer provide free findings or data on this topic beginning this year. Any serious researcher can still download all findings (some free some at cost) from our “HKPORI Poll Data Enquiry System” to compare our findings with those of Pew Research Center. We noticed that Pew has used some different questions to measure ethnic identity, so even though their findings can contribute a lot to the study on an international level, it cannot replace our previous Hong Kong findings on this topic accumulated in a systematic way since 1997. It is a pity that Hong Kong society is moving backward in terms of free and professional opinion research. We could have been a world leader in this area. The public can access to previous ethnic identity findings before July 2023 on pori.hk. For the latest ones conducted after July 2023, they are available at cost on our “HKPORI Poll Data Enquiry System”.

A2: HKPORI did not participate in this study. Yet, both organizations know each other well. Dr Robert Chung, President and CEO of HKPORI, is the President of WAPOR (World Association for Public Opinion Research), and he is actively promoting the global development of free and professional opinion research. HKPORI sees no problem in cooperating with these organizations around the world.

2023-06-29

問題（經過簡化及修改）

‍Q1：民研提及「回歸系列、身分認同、兩岸問題、世界視野、六四事件、議員評分、部隊民望和部份社會指標等」，它們是被取消還是不作公開發表？

Q2：在餘下未受影響的指標中，特首、司長及政府民望、施政報告及預算案反應等，目前估計是會繼續定期進行及發布？特首及政府民望的發佈頻率，也會否有改動？

Q3：取消部分調查或不公開發表結果，主因是什麼？

‍香港民研回覆

‍A1：我們初步的決定，是把上述調查系列全部轉作內部參考、學術研究和付費服務之用，不作公開發表。但是系列中可能有部份題目，不再使用，即是取消。

A2：初步決定，上述調查系列將會繼續進行，數據繼續公開，但頻率未定。

A3：香港民研在每年的五六七月，都會檢討運作和重新定位，今年也不例外。我們會考慮社會對民意數據的需求、香港社會的發展歷程、香港民研在推動科學與民主的角色和所有風險評估，屬於一籃子整體考慮。

Questions (simplified and sub-edited)

‍Q1: PORI mentioned “handover series, ethnic identity, cross-strait issues, global awareness, June Fourth Incident, Councillor ratings, disciplinary forces, and some social indicators”, will they be canceled or moved to private domain?

Q2: Among the remaining indicators that are not affected, will the popularity of the CE, the Secretaries of Departments and the government, the Policy Address and the Budget responses continue to be released regularly? Will there be any change in the frequency of releasing the popularity ratings of CE and the government?

Q3: What are the main reasons for PORI to cancel or no longer release some survey series?

‍Replies from HKPORI

‍A1: We intend to turn all questions mentioned into internal reference, academic research, and commissioned services, but the number of questions for each topic may also be trimmed.

A2: We tentatively decide to continue conducting the series mentioned and release them to the public but their frequencies are yet to be decided.

A3: Every year from May to July, we review and brainstorm our future development. This year is no exception. We take into consideration a variety of factors in one bundle, including the demand for opinion data, the historical development of Hong Kong society, the role of HKPORI in promoting science and democracy, as well as all other risk assessments.

2023-06-12

問題（經簡化及修改）

‍Q1：哪個政府部門與香港民研聯繫過？

Q2：他們就調查報告的發佈有何建議？

Q3：「風險評估」是否與《國家安全法》或《煽動條例》有關？

Q4：香港民研會否考慮之後再發佈有關調查報告？香港民研會否繼續進行明年的六四事件調查？

‍香港民研回覆

‍A1：該部門認為以「政府部門」的名義即可，傳媒及公眾可自行查詢。

A2：他們建議我們不要公佈有關調查報告。

A3：有關部門沒有向我們告知詳情，我們亦沒有詢問。我們尊重有關部門的評估，但不等於我們會在得悉所有細節後，會認同他們的評估。

A4：我們在知悉有關風險評估前，其實已經開始檢視和策劃民研在今年7月1日之後的運作。我們可能會繼續進行一些追蹤調查，又或改變一些題目只供學術研究或內部參考，又或停止某些調查。目前我們尚未決定六四事件調查的去向。

Questions (simplified and sub-edited)

Q1: Which government department(s) contacted HKPORI?

Q2: What suggestions have they made about the release of the survey report?

Q3: Is the “risk assessment” related to the National Security Law or the Sedition Law?

Q4: Will HKPORI consider releasing the survey report some other time? Will HKPORI continue to conduct the survey on June 4th anniversary next year?

Replies from HKPORI

A1: The department considers it sufficient to be named as a “government department”, media or the public can make their own enquiry.

A2: They advised us not to release the survey report in view of their risk assessment.

A3: We were not told, and we did not ask. We respect their assessment, although we may not necessarily agree with their assessment should we have known the details.

A4: We were already in the process of reviewing our operation after July 1 this year, when this risk assessment came. We may continue to conduct some of our tracking surveys, and/or keep some of them for academic or private reference only, and/or stop some of the surveys. We have not yet decided where to put the June 4th anniversary survey, so we have not yet decided how to handle this year’s survey report.

2023-02-10

問題（經簡化及修改）

‍Q1：民研如何抽取次樣本？有何必要？

Q2：為何有那麼多個案有缺數？是否代表受訪者沒有被問到相關問題？

Q3：甚麽是「評分人數」？與次樣本數目有何分別？

Q4：有沒有編碼簿（codebook）可提供？

‍香港民研回覆

‍A1：在使用抽取次樣本（subsampling）方式處理一條問題時，我們通常會設定抽取機率為0.5或0.6，讓系統隨機抽取該比例的受訪者回答該問題。做法可縮短問卷的實際長度，避免受訪者回應疲勞（respondent fatigue），並減低因受訪者拒絕回應所造成的統計偏差（non-response bias）。

A2：如沒有任何數值，一般代表受訪者沒有被問到相關問題。數值「-99」則代表我們有問該問題，但受訪者沒有回答。一般而言，不提問的原因有兩種。其一，是上述的抽取次樣本方法引起。另一原因，則是受訪者早前的回應，已顯示相關問題並不適用。例如，當我們知道受訪者於香港出生，我們便不會問「你來了香港多少年？」

A3：評分題目的「評分人數」只包括能夠給出一個實際分數的受訪者。而我們的「次樣本數目」，則包括所有被問到該問題的受訪者，當中包含給出非分數答案如「唔知／難講」的受訪者，以及拒絕回答的人。

A4：我們以sav及csvy格式提供的數據集已包含每個變量的描述和問題字眼，以及所有變量中可能出現的數值所代表的意思。

Questions (abstracted and sub-edited)

‍Q1: How are subsamples determined and why is it necessary?

Q2: Why are there so many cases with missing data (“NA”s) within variables? Does it mean that the respondents were not asked the question?

Q3: What is the “number of raters”, and how does this differ from the subsample?

Q4: Is there a codebook with more details available?

‍Reply from HKPORI

‍A1: For each question we used the subsampling technique, usually setting the probability (p) at p=0.5 or 0.6 to randomly select each question for each respondent to answer. We took such measures to shorten the effective length of the questionnaire for each respondent to minimise respondent fatigue and to reduce non-response bias.

A2: Lack of any data generally means the respondent was not asked the question. A value of “-99” means the question was asked but the respondent did not answer it. Generally, there are two reasons why questions are not asked. First, the use of subsampling technique as explained above. Second, the questions are not applicable to the respondent, based on his/her answers in some previous questions. For example, if a respondent was born in Hong Kong, we would not ask “How long have you been living in Hong Kong?”

A3: “Number of raters” only counts respondents who gave a “numerical” answer when we asked for a rating. In our definition, “subsample” counts all respondents who were asked the question, which includes also people who gave “non-numerical” answers such as “don’t know / hard to say”, as well as those who refused to answer.

A4: Our datasets provided in sav and csvy formats have already included descriptions and question wording for each variable, as well as the label used for all possible values of all variables.

2022-09-30

市民來函

‍哪裡是香港小小運動員的出路？

本人是一位游泳健將的母親，在剛過去的一個多星期我和很多小運動員家長同樣面對一個艱難的抉擇。

政府較早前宣佈5至11歲兒童必須在9月30日之前打第1劑疫苗，之後在11月30日起前必須完成兩劑疫苗注射。

很多家長看到這報導後都感覺非常惋惜。我得知很多小朋友從來都沒接種過疫苗而且大部分小朋友人將來亦不希望接種疫苗。

包括我在內都覺得進退兩難，而且我聽聞很多家長現在亦只能選擇離開香港，前往一些不須強制接種疫苗的國家繼續生活。

本身我大女亦是一位游泳健將，她非常熱愛游泳這項活動，而且亦曾經屢次獲獎，她從小就希望長大後能代表香港游泳隊參賽，代表香港贏取獎牌為港爭光。

不幸地在這短短的一個多星期，我看到很多有潛質及質素的年輕運動員都選擇盡快離開香港，我感覺十分難過，可惜。

再者我看到很多新聞特別是報道經濟發展的議題，鄰近地區不斷地發動挖角潮，導致很多香港的專業人才，受過高等教育及高收入人士離港，這對香港不同領域的長遠發展影響深遠。

香港永遠是我們的母港，我們不想離開這片美好的家園。

最後希望香港民意研究所能夠幫幫我們這些家長做一個全面性的研究，藉此能讓大家了解我們這群家長的擔憂，謝謝。

小飛魚媽媽

‍民研回覆

‍小飛魚媽媽：

謝謝你的來函，讀後百感交集。

香港民意研究所要進行一個關於小朋友接種過疫的研究，恐怕並易事。

倒不如我們把你的函件，在抹去電郵地址後公開討論，集思廣益。

明天9月23日，剛好是我們每月一次有關民生問題的記者招待會，當中會討論香港疫情。我把你的函件交給評論員自由討論，看看他們的意見，效果可能更好。

方便的話，請你回覆這個電郵，甚或把你的WhatsApp號碼傳給我們，方便聯絡。我們的記招在明天下午2:30進行，如果你有其他想法，請及早通知。

鍾庭耀謹覆

‍
編者再按：
香港民研記招剪輯（來信部分）：https://youtu.be/1Ssu8VJDkWI
‍言責論者自負，與民研無關。

Letter from a Citizen

What is the outlook for our little athletes?

I am the mother of a young swimmer. In the past week or so, I faced a dilemma like many parents of young athletes.

The government announced that children aged 5 to 11 must receive their first dose of the vaccine by September 30, then the second dose by November 30.

Many parents felt very sad after seeing the news. I have learned that many children have never been vaccinated and most of them do not want to be vaccinated in the future. We’ re all in a dilemma, and I have heard that many parents can only choose to leave Hong Kong now and go to other countries that do not require mandatory vaccinations to continue their lives.

My eldest daughter is also a great swimmer. She loves swimming very much and has won many awards. Since she was a young child, she has been hoping to represent the Hong Kong swimming team when she grows up to win medals and glory for Hong Kong.

Unfortunately, I saw that many young athletes with potential and quality chose to leave Hong Kong as soon as possible within a week or so. I feel very sad, and it is a pity.

In addition, I have seen a lot of news reports, especially on the issue of economic development, and the continuous wave of poaching in our neighboring areas has led to the departure of many Hong Kong professionals, highly educated and high-income people, which has a profound impact on the long-term development of Hong Kong in various fields.

Hong Kong will always be our home port, and we do not want to leave this beautiful home.

Finally, I hope that the HKPORI can help us to conduct a comprehensive study, so that everyone can understand the concerns of parents like us, thank you.

From a mother of a little flying fish.

Reply from HKPORI

Mother of the little flying fish:

Thank you for your email, giving me so many mixed feelings.

It is very difficult for HKPORI to conduct a study on the compulsory vaccination of children. We would rather share your email with the public, after deleting your email address. Hopefully this would contribute to the public discussion on this topic.

It so happens that we will have a press conference tomorrow related to people’s livelihood issues, covering pandemic measures. We will share your email with our guest commentators, and let them discuss it freely. This may well be a better option.

IF possible, please reply to this email, and let us know your WhatsApp number. Our press conference starts at 2:30pm tomorrow, so and early reply is appreciated.

From Robert Chung.

From the Editor again:
Press conference video cut (related to the email): https://youtu.be/1Ssu8VJDkWI
All opinions expressed are that of the commentators, not HKPORI.

2022-08-03

向我們提問

...

最新消息

民意研究團隊向市民大眾彙報我們未來動向的地方，包括最新研究課題、合作項目和國際專業活動等等。

專欄文章

回應傳媒及公眾查詢

查詢專業研究服務

Professional Customized Research Services

支持我們

SUPPORT US

香港民研的成功有賴民間社會支持，誠邀即時訂閲或一次性贊助我們

The success of HKPORI requires the support of our civil society in the forms of volunteerism, membership and sponsorship.

香港民意研究所

Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute

民研資訊

最新消息

民意研究團隊向市民大眾彙報我們未來動向的地方，包括最新研究課題、合作項目和國際專業活動等等。

專欄文章

【民調101】百分比不易用？

[Polling 101] Percentages Are Not Easy to Use?

【數字音樂椅】鄧小平經過香港偷學無線電（上）

[Numbers’ Musical Chairs] Deng Xiaoping’s Covert Learning of Radio Technology in Hong Kong (Part 1)

【話說民調】教育的目的是賦予公民參與公共事務的能力

[Dialogues with Survey Data] Education is About Empowering Citizens to Take Part in Public Affairs

陳家洛專欄介紹

Column Introduction - Kenneth Chan

劉銳紹專欄介紹

Column Introduction - Johnny Lau

【民研家書】鍾庭耀給香港的信

Letter to Hongkong from Robert Chung

香港民研 2024 年終回顧：變化中可以抓緊甚麼？

HKPORI 2024 Year-end Review: What Can We Hold Onto Amidst Changes?

【風暴過後】香港還有空間做民調嗎？

【After the Storm】 Is There Still Space for Polling in Hong Kong?

民意研究的本質：自由權利、專業素養、人文精神

The Nature of Public Opinion Research: Liberty, Quality, Humanity

【民研考古】香港民意研究的歷史厚度

【Search for History, Serve the History】The Historical Depth of Hong Kong Public Opinion Research

【盛事隨筆】讓人們的聲音被聽見 用民意解決紛爭

【Notes from Seoul】Let People’s Voices Be Heard: Using Public Opinion to Resolve Conflicts

世界民意研究學會會長的話（2023年1月）

Letter from the WAPOR President (January 2023)

民研雜思一一一二二二

The Ones and Twos of Opinion Research

回應傳媒及公眾查詢

就香港民研未來發展事宜回應傳媒提問（第一輪）

Response to Media Inquiries Regarding HKPORI’s Future Development (Round 1)

就鍾劍華博士被國安處通緝事宜回應傳媒提問

Response to Media Inquiries Regarding Dr. Chung Kim-wah Being Wanted by the National Security Department

編者按：香港民研近日收到傳媒查詢，問及一旦《基本法》23條立法對民研工作的影響。我們現將相關答案件整合發放，以作公眾教育之用。

From the Editor: HKPORI recently received a media enquiry about the potential effects on its work if Basic Law Article 23 is enacted. We have collated our answers here for the purpose of public education.

編者按：香港民研近日收到傳媒查詢，問及皮尤研究中心 (Pew Research Center)有關港人身分認同感的調查。民研認為有關查詢有助市民了解世界民研的發展，於是把相關問答整合發放，以作公眾教育之用。

編者按：香港民研近日收到多個傳媒查詢，內容都是關於我們初步決定取消部分定期調查或不公開發表。我們現將相關問答整合發放，以作公眾教育之用。

From the Editor: HKPORI recently received a number of media enquiries on our tentative decision to cancel some regular survey questions and to move some to the private domain. We have collated them here for the purpose of public education.

編者按：香港民研近日收到多個傳媒查詢，內容都是關於我們因應相關政府部門經過風險評估後的建議，取消發布「六四週年調查報告」。我們現將相關問答整合發放，以作公眾教育之用。

編者按：香港民研於2023年2月2日收到一位研究員的查詢，內容與我們的公開原始數據有關。我們現將相關問答公開，以作公眾教育之用。

From the Editor: On February 2, 2023, HKPORI received a public enquiry from a researcher who has been using our free datasets. The researcher posted a number of questions which we would like to share here for the purpose of public education.

編者按：香港民研在9月22日收到一封署名「小飛魚媽媽」的市民電郵來信，內容談及該位媽媽對強制兒童接種疫苗的擔憂，香港民研現把電郵及回覆刊登。

From the Editor: On September 22, HKPORI received an email from a citizen signed “Mother of a Little Flying Fish”, expressing her concerns about compulsory vaccination of children. HKPORI hereby publishes the email and our reply. The English translation is compiled by HKPORI.

問：為什麼香港民研在比較歷任特首和港督，在上任時的民望數字時，採用單次調查的數字，而非首個月的平均數字？

Q: When comparing the popularity ratings of previous chief executives and governors when they took office, why does PORI use the figures of a single survey rather than the average figures of the first month?

查詢專業研究服務

Professional Customized Research Services

支持我們

SUPPORT US

香港民研的成功有賴民間社會支持，誠邀即時訂閲或一次性贊助我們

The success of HKPORI requires the support of our civil society in the forms of volunteerism, membership and sponsorship.

香港民意研究所

Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute

【盛事隨筆】讓人們的聲音被聽見　用民意解決紛爭