[Public Opinion Brief No. 140] The World as Seen by Korea and Korea as Seen by the World: National Image

[Public Opinion Brief No. 140] A Joint Project by BBC World Service, GlobeScan, and EAI

2014 Global Poll in 24 Countries ②

1. The World as Seen by Korea and Korea as Seen by the World in 2014

2. The World as Seen by Korea: Korean Perceptions of 17 Power Countries

3. The World's Perception of Korea

1. The World as Seen by Korea and Korea as Seen by the World in 2014

The <2014 Global Poll> project, organized by the BBC World Service and GlobeScan with the East Asia Institute (EAI) participating as the research partner for Korea, announces the results of an international survey on the image of 17 countries selected for their significant influence in the international community. In 2014, 24 countries participated in the survey.

Korea has participated in the survey since 2005, evaluating the national images of major countries. Since 2010, Korea has been included among the 17 countries surveyed, allowing for an annual investigation into the changing perceptions of Korea by people worldwide. EAI is responsible for the survey design in Korea, and Korea Research is responsible for the fieldwork.

This report, following EAI Public Opinion Brief No. 139, "National Images of 17 Power Countries as Seen by the World," focuses on analyzing the perceptions of the Korean public and the perceptions of Korea by people around the world. It examines which of the countries wielding international influence Koreans view favorably and which they view unfavorably. Through this, we aim to understand Koreans' perceptions of the international order and global leadership, and conversely, to infer the image of Korea as perceived by the global community.

Perceptions of global power countries, including allies and neighboring nations, are crucial considerations for formulating diplomatic strategies and policies aimed at strengthening alliances, fostering cooperation with neighboring countries, and deterring threats. Public support for countries prioritized by the government's foreign policy strategy allows for the prediction of political costs associated with policy implementation, thereby enhancing the democracy and accountability of government policies.

Furthermore, objectively assessing Korea's national image in the international community provides crucial data to gauge the effectiveness of strategies such as middle-power diplomacy or public diplomacy, which emphasize Korea's active role between major powers and developing nations to enhance its global leadership.

2. The World as Seen by Korea: Korean Perceptions of 17 Power Countries

Summarizing the analysis of the reputation of the 17 power countries from Brief No. 139, we found that (1) advanced Western European countries and Japan are recognized as soft power giants; (2) hard power giants, the United States and China, are not significantly different from middle powers like Brazil, Korea, and India; (3) the international reputation of a country, measured by its soft power, is influenced by global perceptions of its hard power. Economic strength improves a country's international reputation, while excessive military power tends to diminish it; (4) Korea's international reputation is similar to that of South Africa and India, and is more favorable than that of Russia, Israel, North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan. Importantly, when considering only the countries that have participated since 2010, Korea's national image shows a slow but steady improvement.

This section first compares and analyzes the commonalities and differences between Koreans' perceptions of major global power countries and the global order as perceived by the world, as discussed previously, focusing on global perceptions of the international roles of 17 countries.

1) Commonalities Between Korean and Global Perceptions

The left side of [Figure 1] shows the ranking of 17 power countries based on the perceptions of 21 tracked countries presented in Brief No. 139. The right side of [Figure 1] summarizes the results of Koreans' perceptions of the international roles of the 17 power countries. Comparing the two figures reveals commonalities and differences in the perception of soft power between Koreans and people worldwide.

① Alignment in National Preference Order: Western Europe > US/China & BRICS > Threatening Countries

According to the global average perspective in (1) of [Figure 1], Germany (60%), Canada (57%), the United Kingdom (56%), France (50%), Japan (49%), and the EU (47%) are soft power giants with positive evaluation rates exceeding 50% or with positive responses significantly outweighing negative ones. Following them are the United States (42%) and China (42%), South Africa (39%), India (38%), and Korea (38%). These countries are mid-ranked, but global responses show a balance between positive and negative evaluations. For Russia (31%), Israel (24%), North Korea (19%), Iran (16%), and Pakistan (16%), negative evaluations outnumbered positive ones.

As shown in (2) of [Figure 1], Korean perceptions largely align with global perceptions regarding which countries are viewed favorably and which are viewed with aversion. Western European countries are perceived most positively regarding their international roles, followed by South Africa and BRICS nations rapidly emerging on the global stage with economic growth. Strong aversion is expressed towards Israel, Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea.

[Figure 2], which compares Korean and global perceptions, plots the percentage of positive evaluations of 17 countries by people worldwide (horizontal axis) against the percentage of positive evaluations by Koreans (vertical axis). A hypothetical line at a 45-degree angle from the origin represents where Korean and global perceptions align. The upper-left quadrant indicates areas where Korean perceptions are more favorable than the global average, while the lower-right quadrant indicates areas where Korean perceptions are more negative than the global average. The scatter plot shows a generally upward-sloping linear relationship, indicating no significant divergence between global and Korean preferences.

[Figure 1] International Image of 17 Power Countries in 2014 (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2014)

[Figure 2] Comparison of Global Perceptions of Korean National Image among 17 Countries (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2014)

② Alignment in Determinants of Soft Power

Economic Strength as a Factor for Positive Evaluation, Military Spending as a Factor for Negative Evaluation

A country's soft power perception is influenced by its hard power. As examined in Brief No. 139, economic strength positively impacts perception, while military power has a mixed effect. This section expands the discussion to include national resources (population, territory size) that form the basis of hard power. For this analysis, [Figure 2] was augmented with weights for each country's (1) GDP per capita (economic strength), (2) military expenditure as a percentage of government spending (economic strength), (3) population size, and (4) territorial size. The size of the concentric circles increases with the magnitude of each factor for a given country, allowing for an examination of changes in circle size for each variable.

Based on global perceptions, if each of these four factors positively influences international reputation, the concentric circles for countries located to the right of the horizontal axis would be larger. Conversely, if each factor negatively influences international reputation, the concentric circles for countries located to the left would be larger. If the circle size does not show a clear directional trend, it can be interpreted that the factor has no significant impact on national reputation.

From the perspective of Korean perceptions, if each factor positively influences international reputation, the concentric circles for countries located above the vertical axis would be larger. Conversely, if each factor negatively influences international reputation, the concentric circles for countries located below would be larger.

In [Figure 3], the graph weighted by GDP per capita shows larger concentric circles for countries on the right side of the horizontal axis (Western European countries). However, on the vertical axis, Japan, located in the lower section, is an exception with a large circle. Excluding Japan, countries located in the upper section also have large circles. This suggests that economic strength positively influences national reputation for both global perceptions and Korean perceptions, with the exception of Japan.

Regarding military spending, the opposite trend is observed: countries located in the lower-left quadrant generally have larger concentric circles, while those in the upper-right quadrant have smaller circles. This indicates that countries with excessive military spending, regardless of whether they are perceived globally or by Koreans, tend to receive lower international reputations (lower-left quadrant).

National Size (Population, Territory) Has No Direct Impact on International Reputation

- Countries with large sizes are clustered in the middle; smaller countries also have high international reputations.

However, when weighted by population size or territorial size, countries with strong national resources (indicated by large concentric circles) are clustered in the middle. This suggests that the size of national resources is not a direct variable in improving or deteriorating a country's image in the international community. Whether viewed from the horizontal axis (global perceptions) or the vertical axis (Korean perceptions), it is difficult to establish a clear correlation in the size of the concentric circles.

[Figure 3] Factors Influencing International Reputation: Economic Power-Military Power-Country Size (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2014)

2) Differences

① Overwhelming Pro-Western Bias

Korean national image: Germany 84%, Canada 76%, UK 74%, France/EU 70%

Germans' preference for Germany only 68%, over 15 percentage points higher than the global average

While there were commonalities in the overall preference order, the intensity of these preferences differed significantly. Firstly, Koreans' positive evaluations of Western European countries, which received high global ratings, were higher than those of the citizens of those countries themselves, neighboring European nations within the EU, or North American countries with long-standing cooperative relationships. Generally, in non-European countries or those with different cultural spheres, the positive evaluation rates for Western European countries are relatively lower compared to European countries.

In Korea's case, despite geographical distance and significant cultural differences, positive evaluations for Germany were overwhelmingly high at 84%, Canada at 76%, the UK at 74%, and France/EU at 70%. Considering that Germans themselves rated Germany's international role positively at only 67%, the high positive evaluation rate by Koreans is remarkable. This contrasts with the results from Japan (46% positive evaluation) and China (42% positive evaluation).

To further clarify the characteristics of Korean perceptions, [Figure 4] calculates the difference between the percentage of positive evaluations of each country by Koreans and the global average percentage of positive evaluations. For Korea (30%p), Germany (24%p), the EU (23%p), Canada (21%p), France (20%p), the UK (18%p), and the US (16%p), the positive evaluation rates are more than 15 percentage points higher than the global average. The high reputation of Korea can be attributed to national pride and subjective factors, while the strong pro-Western/pro-US sentiment likely reflects support during the Korean War and post-war reconstruction, and in the case of the US, the current threat from North Korea. However, even considering these factors, the strong bias towards pro-Western countries among Koreans is highly unusual compared to other non-Western countries.

[Figure 4] Gap (%) between Korea's Positive Perception Rate for 17 Countries and for 21 Countries

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2014)

② Underestimation Bias Towards Neighboring Countries: Japan, North Korea, China

Global average (Japan 49%, North Korea 19%, China 42%) vs. Korean public (Japan 15%, North Korea 3%, China 32%))

In contrast to the pro-Western/pro-US bias, a tendency for Koreans to underestimate neighboring countries is observed. Japan is the most significantly devalued. Globally, Japan received a high approval rating of nearly 50% (49%) among 21 countries, but only 15% in Korea, a difference of over 34 percentage points. The tendency for Koreans to devalue Japan is partly rooted in deep-seated anti-Japanese sentiment stemming from the colonial experience. However, the 2014 survey results showing Koreans' disparaging attitude towards Japan also reflect the intensified historical disputes, Dokdo/Takeshima issues, and diplomatic friction between Korea and Japan following the rise of the Abe administration and Japan's military buildup. Considering that positive evaluations of Japan in Korea had been steadily improving until the advent of the Abe administration, the Korean public's devaluation of Japan cannot be solely attributed to anti-Japanese sentiment.

Furthermore, attitudes towards North Korea and China are also more negative by over 10 percentage points compared to the global average. [Figure 4] shows that for North Korea, the global average is 19%, while the Korean average is 3%, a difference of over 16 percentage points. The negative perception of North Korea among Koreans is likely influenced by the escalating military threats from North Korea since the mid-2000s, including nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island and the sinking of the Cheonan. As Korea is the direct target of these threats, this has intensified negative perceptions of North Korea compared to the global average.

Regarding China, the global average is 42%, while Korean public perception is 32%, a difference of about 10 percentage points. Although perceptions of China in Korea have shown some improvement recently (Public Opinion Brief No. 139), this survey confirms that negative perceptions of China remain strong. Various factors have negatively impacted bilateral relations, including the Goguryeo history dispute, economic friction due to Chinese fishing vessels, and food safety issues. Notably, China's protective stance towards North Korea's military threats has reinforced negative perceptions of China. With the Xi Jinping administration, changes in China's attitude towards North Korea and the willingness of the Korean and Chinese governments to cooperate are frequently reported to the Korean public. It remains to be seen whether these changes will lead to an improvement in perceptions of China within Korea.

3. The World's Perception of Korea

This survey is unique among international opinion polls in that it regularly assesses Korea's international reputation in approximately 20 countries worldwide each year. Evaluations of Korea have been conducted since the 2010 survey. This section first examines the changes in the aggregated overall evaluation results of respondent countries and how Koreans themselves perceive Korea's international role. Next, given that the participating countries are spread across all regions (North America, Western Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia), we will analyze how perceptions of Korea's international image have changed over the past five years by region. Furthermore, we will identify specific countries within each region that view Korea favorably or unfavorably, and where positive perceptions are strengthening or weakening. We will also examine the fluctuations in the positive image of Korea over the past five years for each individual country. This will help derive implications for the direction of public diplomacy strategies and policy formulation at the individual country and regional levels.

1) The World's Perception of Korea in 2014

Countries with a positive evaluation rate exceeding 50% for Korea's international role are classified as pro-Korea (親韓) countries. Countries with a negative evaluation rate exceeding 50% are classified as anti-Korea (反韓) countries. Countries with positive evaluations between 40% and 49% and negative evaluations below 40% are classified as friendly countries. Countries with negative evaluations between 40% and 49% and positive evaluations below 40% are classified as unfriendly countries. Other countries are classified as neutral.

Pro-Korea countries - Positive perception: Ghana 63%, Australia 62%, USA 55%

Anti-Korea countries - Germany's positive perception of Korea 24%, negative perception 59%

In the 2014 survey, representative pro-Korea countries include Ghana, Australia, and the United States, with positive evaluations of Korea exceeding 50% among their populations (Ghana 63%, Australia 62%, USA 55%). Germany stands out as a country with a strong anti-Korea image. While 84% of Koreans rated Germany positively, making it the most idealized country, only 24% of Germans responded positively about Korea, with a significant 59% expressing negative views, the only country among the 22 surveyed where negative responses outnumbered positive ones. Considering Germany's generally reserved external evaluations, a 24% positive rating for Korea is not necessarily a poor result, as it ranked sixth in terms of positive evaluations among the 17 surveyed countries.

Friendly countries: Canada, Nigeria, Indonesia, China

Turkey, Russia, Kenya, India, Pakistan have favorable public opinion but a significant 40% abstention rate

Friendly countries, where positive evaluations are close to 50% (40-49%) and unfavorable attitudes do not exceed 40%, include Canada, Nigeria, Indonesia, and China. In Canada, 48% responded positively and 37% negatively. Nigeria showed 46% positive and 36% negative responses. In Asia, Indonesia had 48% positive and 27% negative responses, while China had 40% positive and 32% negative responses.

For Turkey, Russia, Kenya, India, and Pakistan, positive responses were only around 30%, while negative responses were in the 20% range, indicating a generally favorable public opinion. However, with over 40% of respondents answering "don't know" or withholding their response, these countries can be seen as having no distinct image of Korea.

Unfavorable Countries: Latin America and Spain

Japan and Israel: Low positive evaluations but a large proportion of undecided respondents

Conversely, unfavorable evaluations ranged from 40% to 49%, nearing a majority, and favorable evaluations did not exceed 40%. Unfavorable countries were primarily located in Latin America. Brazil had higher negative responses with 32% positive and 41% negative. Mexico's positive responses were only 22%, while negative responses reached 41%. Chile had overwhelmingly negative responses with 21% positive and 40% negative. Excluding Latin American countries, Spain also showed a predominantly unfavorable public opinion towards Korea's image. Positive evaluations were only 21%, while negative responses were as high as 40%.

Meanwhile, Japan and Israel had the lowest positive evaluations among the surveyed countries, at 13% and 11% respectively, but negative evaluations were around 37% and 25%. While negative evaluations were generally higher, the proportion of undecided respondents was significant: 50% in Japan and 64% in Israel. This indicates that a large segment of the population in these countries is either unaware of or indifferent to Korea's international role.

Countries with Balanced Favorable and Unfavorable Opinions: United Kingdom, France

The United Kingdom and France stand out as countries where positive and negative images of Korea are in a close contest. In the UK, positive evaluations of Korea were 45% and negative evaluations were 45%. In France, positive evaluations were 42% and negative evaluations were 46%, indicating a divided image of Korea.

In summary, North American and African countries generally hold a positive perception, Asian and European countries are divided, and Latin American countries tend to have a strong negative perception of Korea.

[Figure 5] 2014 National Image Survey Results of Korea in 22 Countries (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2014)

2) Changes in Korea's Image Over Five Years

Following an examination of the distribution of evaluations of Korea's international image in 2014, this section analyzes the trend of response changes over the five-year period from 2010 to 2014. Figure 6 presents the overall average for Korean citizens and 21 countries worldwide, and examines the trend of changes in Korea's image by region through regional averages. Figure 7 analyzes the trend of perception changes in individual countries by region, thereby categorizing the trends of changes in Korea's image by region and the distribution of public opinion within regions, and reviewing the magnitude of fluctuations in Korea's image for each country.

① Korea as Seen by 21 Countries Worldwide

Gradual but Steady Upward Trend; Korea's Self-Perception: Recovering After Deterioration in 2012

As argued in Public Opinion Briefing No. 139, a time-series analysis of the survey results from 21 countries participating in the evaluation of Korea over five years shows that positive evaluations of Korea increased from 33% in 2010 to 38% in 2014. While the difference in these figures may not be statistically significant considering the margin of error, the trend reveals a consistently gradual and steady upward movement. This can be speculated as a reflection of the efforts made by successive governments to consistently strengthen middle-power diplomacy and public diplomacy. However, further follow-up work is needed to verify the actual effectiveness.

While the results of South Koreans' self-assessment of Korea's international role are not included in the calculation of Korea's image assessment, they provide data that can reveal how objectively Koreans evaluate Korea's role, or conversely, their national pride and nationalistic sentiments. In the 2011 survey, a remarkable 84% expressed a positive evaluation of Korea's international role, showing an upward trend, but it sharply dropped to 57% in 2012, and then rose to 64% in 2013 and 68% in 2014.

The sharp decline in positive evaluations of Korea's role in 2012 is presumed to reflect the temporal characteristics of a period when the government's visible diplomatic activities were difficult due to the free school lunch debate and the general and presidential elections in 2012, as well as the abrupt cooling of relations with Japan in early 2012. The improvement in perceptions of Korea's role since the emergence of the new administration appears to have been influenced by the active pursuit of state visits by the government. This point also requires more sophisticated verification.

② Regional Average Analysis: Areas of Improvement and Vulnerability in Korea's Image

Areas of Image Improvement

North America: 42% in 2010 → 52% in 2014, Africa: 34% → 48%

Over the past five years, the regions where the international community's image of Korea has notably improved are North America and Africa. In North America (USA, Canada), the proportion of positive evaluations of Korea's image rose from 42% in the 2010 survey to 52% in 2014, a 10 percentage point increase. In Africa (Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya), it increased from 34% in the 2010 survey to 48% in the 2014 survey. The significant improvement in Korea's national image in the United States, where concerns about deteriorating public sentiment existed, and in Canada, an advanced soft power nation, is not only a positive development from a security perspective but also suggests that perception improvement is possible in developed countries.

Western Europe and Asia: Improving Trend

Europe: 27% → 33%, Asia: 33% → 38%

Meanwhile, survey results from four Western European countries (UK, France, Germany, Spain) and six Asia-Pacific countries (China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Australia) show a 5 percentage point increase in positive evaluations of Korea compared to five years ago. The average for the four Western European countries rose from 27% in 2010 to 33% in 2014, and the average for the six Asian countries rose from 33% in 2010 to 38% in 2014. While cautious interpretation is needed considering the margin of error, the consistent trend suggests that this upward trend may not be a temporary phenomenon, which is positive.

Latin America: Sharp Decline in Korea's Image - Urgent Measures Needed

Russia/Middle East: Slight Increase

Analyzing regional perceptions, the deterioration of Korea's image is particularly noticeable in Latin America. While positive evaluations stood at 41% in the 2010 survey, they dropped to 28% in the 2014 survey, a decline of about 13 percentage points. As this is an average of four countries out of over 50 countries in Latin America, it is difficult to generalize it as a problem for the entire region; however, a thorough investigation into the factors behind the worsened image of Korea in at least the surveyed countries seems necessary. The aggregated results for Russia and the Middle East (Israel, Turkey) show an improvement of about 5 percentage points, similar to Asia and Western Europe, from 23% in 2010 to 28% in 2014. Given that the average for these three countries still falls below 30%, it is a region that requires attention for improving Korea's national image.

[Figure 6] Global/Regional/Korean Perceptions of Korea's Positive Image (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2010-2014)

③ Typology of Regional Perceptions of Korea

At the individual country level, the primary task is to diagnose whether public opinion in that country is deteriorating or improving. On the other hand, at the regional strategy development level, it is important to understand whether public opinion in individual countries is converging within the region, or whether polarized fissures are emerging among country groups. Figure 7 categorizes the trends in public opinion in individual countries within regions and classifies regional public opinion based on convergence as follows.

By crossing these two axes, we can categorize them into (1) regions where public opinion in individual countries within the region converges in a direction of improvement, (2) regions where public opinion within the region converges in a direction of deterioration, (3) regions showing an improving trend but with perceptual fissures within the region, and (4) regions showing a deteriorating trend but with perceptual fissures within the region. It is unnecessary to emphasize that differentiated strategies are needed for each type.

[Table 1] Typology Based on Korea's Image Change Direction and Regional Public Opinion Distribution

(1) Image Improvement - Convergence Type: USA 46%→55%, Canada 37%→48%, Ghana 41%→63% over 5 years

Regions where public opinion in individual countries within the region converges toward image improvement include countries in North America and Africa, where the magnitude of image improvement by region was large. In North America, the USA's positive evaluation rose from 46% in 2010 to 55% in 2014, and Canada's from 37% to 48%. In Africa, Ghana's positive evaluation increased from 41% in 2010 to 63% in 2014, and Nigeria's sharply increased from 31% to 46%. Kenya maintained a gradual upward trend, rising from 31% in 2010 to 36% in 2015.

(2) Image Deterioration - Convergence Type: Chile 45%→21%, Brazil 40%→22%, Mexico 38%→32%

The survey results from four Latin American countries show a general sharp decline. Chile's positive evaluation dropped by 24 percentage points from 45% to 21% over five years, Brazil's from 40% to 22%, and Mexico's from 38% to 32%. Only Peru showed a slight increase from 29% in 2011 to 32% in 2012, but overall, a significant decline is evident.

(3) Image Improvement - Fissure Type: Europe and Asia

UK-France: Sharp Improvement in Korea's Image, Germany-Spain: Deterioration

Although Europe showed a gradual upward trend, there were significant variations among countries within the region. While the sharp improvement in the image of the UK and France is welcome news, similar to the improvement in North American developed countries, the complete lack of improvement in the image of Korea in Germany and Spain, which have strong anti-Korean sentiment, is an area that needs to be addressed.

(4) Image Deterioration - Fissure Type: Middle East (Turkey - Improvement, Israel - Deterioration)

Russia is a country where a significant portion of respondents remain undecided about Korea, but continuous efforts are being made to improve Korea's international image. However, with nearly 40% of the population still withholding their opinion on Korea's image, Korea's presence remains weak.

In the Middle East, there is a coexistence of countries like Turkey, which shows an improving trend in its image of Korea, and Israel, where favorable public opinion towards Korea is low. However, considering that both Turkey and Israel, like Russia, have a high proportion of undecided respondents, it can be said that Korea's image has not yet become entrenched.

[Figure 7] Trend of Positive Image of Korea by Individual Country (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2010-2014)

④ Trend of Korea's Image by Individual Country

Figure 7 shows the magnitude of change in the proportion of positive evaluations of Korea over the past five years for individual countries. The main characteristics are summarized as follows.

Australia's Rediscovery: World's Largest Pro-Korea Nation. Up 27%p in 5 years

Australia has shown the greatest improvement in its image of Korea. As a neighboring country in the Asia-Pacific region, the Korea-Australia relationship is considered important, and the image has improved by 27 percentage points over the past five years. Considering that in the 2006 CCGA-East Asia Institute survey, the favorability rating of Koreans was 65 out of 100 points, higher than the UK (63 points) and the USA (59 points), the mutual perception between the people of both countries can be assessed as strong. With the increasing emphasis on middle power diplomacy and resource diplomacy in Korea, the strengthening of friendly perceptions between the people of both countries is expected to be a great asset for the development of bilateral relations.

Improvement of Korea's Image in Western Countries - UK 16%p, France 12%p, USA: Image Improvement by 9%

The improvement in Korea's reputation in the United States, a key partner in Korea's diplomacy, compared to the past, and especially since surpassing the 50% mark in the 2010s, represents a significant change. While public opinion in both countries sometimes placed a burden on Korea-US relations, the strengthening of friendly attitudes between the people of both countries at this juncture is expected to contribute to the more effective operation of the Korea-US alliance.

Meanwhile, the improvement in Korea's image in the UK and France among Western European countries is also noteworthy. While positive images of Korea were only around 30% five years ago, with relatively more negative images, positive evaluations have entered the 40% range over the past five years, and negative evaluations have become comparable. This indicates that efforts to enhance Korea's national standing are bearing fruit.

Africa, West Asia (India, Pakistan), Russia: Increase in Favorability Towards Korea

The improvement of Korea's international image in Africa, emerging as the heart of economic development, and in India and Pakistan, which are attracting global attention with their large populations and markets, as well as in Russia, is also a noteworthy result of this survey. Consistent effects of improving Korea's image have been observed in these countries. Africa could serve as a new foundation for pro-Korea diplomacy from Korea's perspective. Although positive evaluations of Korea are improving, the intensity of positive evaluations is relatively lower compared to countries like Germany, the USA, China, and Japan, which is a point to consider.

China-Japan, Latin America: Image Improvement as a Task

This survey also clearly reveals challenges. Above all, the image of Korea has sharply declined in neighboring countries with which cooperation is most crucial, such as China and Japan. In Japan, it has fallen by a significant 23 percentage points compared to five years ago, and in China, by 17 percentage points. Conversely, favorability towards China and Japan has also plummeted in Korea, indicating a mutual worsening of negative attitudes, which is expected to pose a greater diplomatic burden. Regionally, in Latin American countries, Korea's image is not only absolutely negative but has also seen significant declines, particularly in Chile, Korea's first FTA partner, by 24 percentage points, and in Mexico by 18 percentage points and Brazil by 6 percentage points.

[Figure 8] Change in Korea's Image by Individual Country (2014 Positive Rate - 2010 Positive Rate, %p)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2010-2014)

[Reference] Cautious Interpretation of Asymmetrical Public Opinion between Korea and Germany

- Germany generally holds an exclusive attitude towards non-European countries; favorability towards Korea ranks 6th out of 17 countries.

Looking solely at bilateral relations, overcoming the asymmetry in perceptions between South Korea and Germany is clearly a challenge. In South Korea's case, a substantial 84% hold a positive view of Germany, whereas only 24% expressed a positive perception of South Korea, with a negative evaluation reaching 59%. However, the negative perception among German citizens is not solely a Korean issue; it reflects a broader trend of German citizens holding generally exclusive views towards other countries, not just South Korea. Nevertheless, in terms of German citizens' evaluations, South Korea ranked sixth most positively among 17 countries. While efforts must be made to mitigate negative perceptions, the exclusive nature of German citizens' views towards non-European countries must be taken into account (Figure 8).

[Figure 9] German citizens' evaluations of 17 power countries in 2014 (%)

Source: BBC · GlobeScan · EAI Global Poll (2010-2014)