[Public Opinion Briefing 23-1] Eradicating Racial Discrimination is a Universal Value

[Public Opinion Briefing No. 23] "Comparative International Perceptions of Racial Discrimination"

[Topic 1] Global Human Rights Consciousness Viewed Through the Lens of Racial Issues

[Topic 2] The Reality and Illusion of Racial/Ethnic Equality Consciousness in Korea

Topic 1. Global Human Rights Consciousness Viewed Through the Lens of Racial Issues

Eradication of Racial Discrimination is a Universal Value, but Real Improvement is Still Far Off

Lee Na-young, Director of the Public Opinion Analysis Center

□ Eradicating Racial Discrimination is a Universal Value: 90% in 16 Countries Perceive it as an Important Issue

- India, Russia, Ukraine, etc., are countries insensitive to racial discrimination issues

People worldwide are speaking with one voice for the eradication of racial discrimination. This is the result of an international human rights consciousness survey conducted in 16 countries, organized by WorldPublicOpinion.org, an international public opinion research institute, and participated in by the East Asia Institute (Director: Lee Sook-jong, Professor at Sungkyunkwan University) and the Kyunghyang Shinmun, in commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

When asked about the importance of resolving racial discrimination, 90% (69% “Very Important” + 21% “Somewhat Important”) of the 14,698 respondents across 16 countries perceived it as an important issue. Only 10% in total responded “Not very important,” “Not important at all,” or “Other.” This indicates a broad global consensus on the importance of achieving racial and gender equality. In Western developed countries such as the UK (97%), the US (96%), and France (94%), over 80-90% of respondents in most countries agreed on its importance.

However, only Indian respondents showed a lower perception of the importance of achieving racial equality, with 44% responding “Very Important” and 15% responding “Somewhat Important,” totaling 59%. When considering the intensity of agreement, the proportion of respondents who considered racial discrimination as a “Very Important Issue” reached an average of 69% across the 16 surveyed countries, significantly exceeding the majority in 13 countries. In former Soviet republics like Russia (37%) and Ukraine (50%), or in India (44%), where remnants of racial hierarchy persist, the proportion perceiving it as a “Very Important Issue” fell below the majority.

Korean citizens also perceive the issue of eradicating racial discrimination as very important. The response rate for "Very Important" regarding the importance of achieving racial equality was a remarkable 71%, ranking sixth highest among the 16 surveyed countries. This contrasts sharply with the response for gender equality, where only 43% considered it very important. This suggests that Koreans perceive the issue of achieving racial equality as more important than the issue of gender equality.

□ Despite Consensus on Eradicating Racial Discrimination, a Majority (59%) Evaluate it as Improved Compared to the Past

□ Substantive Improvement is Insufficient: Only 20% Responded “Greatly Improved”

- Western countries like the UK and US relatively highly evaluate the degree of improvement in their own racial discrimination issues

- Racial discrimination has not substantively improved,

- Koreans: 4% believe racial discrimination has "Greatly Improved"

How do citizens in various countries perceive the improvement of human rights discrimination? The prevailing view is that racial discrimination has improved compared to the past. Responses indicating that issues of racial/ethnic equality have improved compared to the past (“Greatly improved” 20% + “Slightly improved” 39%) reached 59%. However, the situation changes when asked about the degree of substantive improvement. Only 20% of the total respondents across 16 countries felt that racial discrimination has “Greatly Improved” compared to the past.

Ultimately, while the world emphasizes the issue of racial discrimination and a broad consensus on the importance of its resolution is spreading, and although it is seen as having improved compared to the past, there is a significant gap between perception and reality, making it difficult to assess significant improvement.

□ Government Intervention Needed to Bridge the Gap Between Perception and Reality,

․ Support for Government Intervention is High in Western Developed Countries like the US, UK, and France, and Even Higher in Asian Countries

․ Support for Government Intervention to Resolve Racial Discrimination: "World Average 79%, Korea 96%" - Ranked 1st Among Surveyed Countries

People worldwide believe that governments have a responsibility to bridge the gap between the spread of racial equality awareness and the reality of improvement. Eight out of ten respondents across 16 countries answered that the government should intervene to resolve racial discrimination issues. While citizens in India and Azerbaijan, and Russia, which were found to be insensitive to racial discrimination issues, were similarly reluctant for government intervention, most other countries argued that the responsibility for improving and resolving racial discrimination lies with the government.

In Western developed countries such as the US (83%), UK (85%), and France (85%), the proportion recognizing government responsibility for resolving racial issues was also high. Notably, the emphasis on government responsibility was even more pronounced in Asian countries, including Korea. Chinese citizens (90%) and Indonesian citizens (88%) supported government intervention to resolve racial discrimination. In Korea, there is a strong tendency to seek solutions to major social issues through government action, and racial discrimination is no exception. The response rate for government intervention to resolve racial/ethnic discrimination issues was a remarkable 96% in Korea, the highest among the 16 surveyed countries.

□ Opinions Diverge on the Extent of Government Intervention,

․ Current Level Sufficient 22%, Government Role Should Be Expanded 54%, Excessive 5%, Should Be Reduced 12%

․ Racial Discrimination: "Government Role Should Be Further Expanded" - 54% in 16 Surveyed Countries, 91% in Korea - Ranked 1st Among Surveyed Countries

While acknowledging the legitimacy of government intervention for resolving human rights issues, there were differing national stances on expanding the government's role in resolving racial discrimination. Among respondents who agreed that the government should intervene to eradicate racial discrimination, 22% felt the current level was sufficient, 5% considered it excessive, and 12% believed it should be reduced.

Notably, countries that are sensitive to racial issues but perceive insufficient substantive improvement tend to desire greater government involvement. This includes Korea (91%), Mexico (86%), China (70%), France (68%), and Indonesia (66%). In these countries, the opinion that the government's role should be expanded, rather than being sufficient or needing reduction, was high. These figures significantly exceed the average response rate of 54% across the 16 countries that called for expanded government intervention in racial issues.

However, in countries like India and Russia, which have been less sensitive to racial issues, the government is lukewarm about playing a larger role. Conversely, in Western countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, which consider racial and gender discrimination as very important issues and are relatively strongly evaluated as having improved significantly, the proportion of those who recognize the need for government roles in resolving racial discrimination is over 80%. However, they are lukewarm about expanding that role beyond the current level. Only 45% of Americans and 54% of Britons who responded that government intervention is necessary answered that the government's role should be expanded. This result significantly surpasses the average of 53% of respondents in 16 countries who called for an expanded government role in women's issues [Figure 4].

□ Analysis of Social Pressure Types for Human Rights Agendas in Each Country: Leading, Conflict, Preventive, Latent

․ US and UK: High level of perceived importance and assessment of significant improvement

․ Countries with Low Improvement Relative to Perception Level (France, Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, etc.) Have High Potential for Social Conflict

․ Korea: Low Improvement Assessment (4%) Relative to High Racial Equality Consensus (71%) - "Conflict Type"

Based on the degree to which human rights agendas are perceived as important and the perceived degree of improvement in actual racial issues within each country, the human rights consciousness characteristics of individual countries can be broadly classified into four types.

First is the Leading Type. This includes countries like the UK and US, where the importance of eradicating racial discrimination is highly valued, and the perception of significant improvement in reality is also relatively high.

Second is the Preventive Type, where citizens have a weak sense of the severity of racial discrimination issues but believe these issues have improved significantly, thus preventing conflict. In terms of racial discrimination issues, Iran and India can be considered to belong to this type.

Third is the type where citizens recognize the importance of racial equality but perceive the degree of improvement in reality as low. Mexico, France, Nigeria, Korea, and Palestine fall into this category. Their dissatisfaction with reality falling short of high expectations leads to a strong tendency towards government intervention.

Finally, there is the Latent Type, characterized by a perception that both the actual experience of gender equality and the degree of improvement are weak. While there is dissatisfaction with the reality of improvement, the intensity of perceiving these issues as important is also low, preventing potential dissatisfaction from directly erupting into social conflict.

In Korea's case, regarding the issue of racial discrimination, 71% responded that it is a "Very Important Issue," while only 4% responded that it has greatly improved compared to the past, indicating a significant gap between perception and reality. Consequently, issues related to multicultural families and foreign workers are highly likely to emerge as significant social conflicts. In contrast, regarding gender equality, only 23% assessed that gender inequality issues have "Greatly Improved" compared to the past, falling short of the average of 29% across all surveyed countries. However, the proportion perceiving gender inequality issues as urgent is also significantly lower than in other countries, suggesting that the gender agenda is unlikely to surface prominently in the immediate future [See Figure 5].

Classification of Perception Types Based on Gender Equality Awareness and Perceived Improvement in Gender Equality in Each Country

Note 1. Baseline is the average response rate for each country among the 16 countries: Racial Equality (Very Important 69%, Greatly Improved 20%)

Note 2. 'High' and 'low' here refer to relative terms, i.e., higher or lower than the 'average', not absolute values.