Public Perceptions of Poverty in 2005
Andrew Darton provides an outline of findings from the most recent round of quantitative surveying in the Public Perceptions of Poverty (PPP) research programme. It is based on the Wave 5 PPP quantitative data, which were collected by means of face to face interviews from 2,104 adults in England Wales and Scotland, between 13 and 17 January 2006. The survey was administered through the TNS Omnimas Service. As well as presenting the Wave 5 data, the article makes comparisons with findings from previous waves; in so doing the article goes some way towards establishing the impact of 2005 on perceptions of poverty among the British public.
Across all 5 waves, the PPP survey asked a common question to measure levels of headline concern about 'poverty in poor countries'. In general, the proportion of the public saying they were 'very concerned' about poverty in poor countries rose steadily up to July 2005, and then declined in the second half of the year, returning to pre-2005 levels (26 per cent said they were 'very concerned' in January 2006). However, this smooth pattern was interrupted by the London bombings of 7 July 2005. The Wave 3 fieldwork, conducted the following week, showed an unexpected dip in the proportion of the public being 'very concerned' (26 per cent). Thus the peak level was recorded in April 2005 (Wave 2), when 32 per cent of the public reported being 'very concerned' about poverty in poor countries.
  |
  |
  |
PPP surveying consistently assessed levels of public awareness and knowledge of five key campaigns and themes: MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY (MPH); Fair Trade; Trade Justice; Drop the Debt; More and Better Aid. Across the five key campaigns and themes, public awareness peaked in Wave 3 (post-G8, in July 2005), and has fallen back since then. In July 2005, 87 per cent of the public said they were aware of MPH; however, in January 2006 (Wave 5) slightly fewer of the public (81 per cent) were aware of MPH. The other campaign themes performed similarly in terms of awareness, but at much lower levels. For instance, 57 per cent of the public was aware of Trade Justice in July 2005 (falling back to 53 per cent in January 2006).
While awareness of MPH appeared to have slipped back by Wave 5, levels of reported involvement in MPH declined similarly. In January 2006, 12 per cent of the public reported having been involved in MPH, against the peak level of reported involvement of 15 per cent, which was recorded in Wave 3 (July 2005). This slight downward trend in levels of involvement in MPH could be attributed to failing recall over time (as the memory of MPH has dimmed in the public mind since July 2005).
In terms of the actions undertaken, buying or wearing a white band was by far the most popular form of involvement, reported by nearly two thirds (61 per cent) of the MPH-involved in Wave 5. Far fewer people reported having undertaken any other MPH action: over a quarter (29 per cent) of the MPH-involved said they had watched a Live8 concert on television, while only 15 per cent of the MPH-involved reported registering on the MPH website, and only 13 per cent reported having sent an email to a politician.
The PPP survey has consistently asked two questions exploring the public's sense of agency (ie. that they could personally take action on poverty which would make a real difference). Responses to these two statements hardly varied across the five waves of surveying, although it is notable that some of the lowest levels of agency were reported in Wave 5 (January 2006). Thus, in Wave 1 (December 2004), 40 per cent of respondents agreed 'there is nothing I can do to tackle poverty in poor countries'; in January 2006, 44 per cent agreed with this. A comparable statement achieved even less variation across the year: in Wave 1, 59 per cent of the public agreed 'The only thing I can do to tackle poverty in poor countries is to give money to charities and appeals', while 57 per cent agreed in Wave 5.
A similar pattern of little change emerges in response to the PPP survey's questions on debt trade and aid. Across a range of attitude statements asked consistently in the five waves of tracking, little significant variation was apparent; what peaks there were tended to occur in July 2005 (Wave 3). For instance, the most agreed-with statement was 'in order to tackle world poverty, we need fairer trade not free trade'[see Figure 1]. In Wave One (December 2004) 71 per cent of respondents agreed with this statement; the level peaked in Wave 3 (at 77 per cent) before falling back to 74 per cent in Wave 5 (January 2006).
Looking across all five waves of PPP survey data, reported awareness of and involvement in MPH appears to have peaked in July 2005, at the time of the G8 Summit in Gleneagles. Since then, levels of awareness and involvement have steadily (if only slightly) declined. It is interesting to note that support for attitude statements which are positive about tackling poverty also peaked in Wave 3, and has subsided since. The principal conclusion from the PPP data so far is that, where perceptions of poverty had become slightly more positive by July 2005, in the second part of the year they appeared to slip back to pre-2005 levels.
Andrew Darnton (ad@andrewdarnton.co.uk) is an independent researcher who is working on the three-year 'Public Perceptions of Poverty' research programme for Comic Relief.
Public Perceptions of Poverty (PPP) has been funded by DFID's Development Awareness Fund and has three objectives:
- Assess levels of public awareness and understanding of world poverty.
- Explore barriers and drivers to public empathy and action.
- Investigate the role of the media, of Red Nose Day, and MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY.