Statistikk innhold
Statistics about
Attitudes towards immigrants and immigration
The statistics are based on a survey. The purpose of the statistics is to map the attitudes of the Norwegian population towards various aspects of the national immigration and refugee policy and towards immigrants as a group. This year's survey was conducted between January 2 and February 10.
Selected figures from this statistics
- Attitudes towards immigrants and receiving refugees. Per centDownload table as ...Attitudes towards immigrants and receiving refugees. Per cent
2015 2023 2024 Most immigrants make an important contribution to Norwegian working life Strongly agree 30 49 45 Agree on the whole 42 38 37 Disagree on the whole 7 3 4 Strongly disagree 3 1 2 Most immigrants enrich the cultural life in Norway Strongly agree 36 45 43 Agree on the whole 35 34 32 Disagree on the whole 8 5 7 Strongly disagree 6 3 4 Most immigrants are a cause of insecurity in society Strongly agree 7 3 7 Agree on the whole 19 11 15 Disagree on the whole 30 34 29 Strongly disagree 27 38 37 Attitudes towards refugees' and asylum seekers' access to residence permits in Norway. Compared to today, should it be easier, more difficult or remain the same as today? Easier 15 22 18 As today 50 58 51 More difficult 29 9 19 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Attitudes towards seven statements on immigrants. Per centDownload table as ...Attitudes towards seven statements on immigrants. Per cent
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Most immigrants make an important contribution to Norwegian working life Strongly agree 30 21 27 29 31 40 48 45 49 45 Agree on the whole 42 45 44 43 45 38 32 36 38 37 Neither agree nor disagree 15 14 15 12 11 13 12 12 7 9 Disagree on the whole 7 14 10 11 9 6 4 4 3 4 Strongly disagree 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 Don't know 2 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 4 Most immigrants abuse the system of social benefits Strongly agree 8 8 9 6 7 6 5 3 3 5 Agree on the whole 17 22 17 19 18 14 11 11 10 14 Neither agree nor disagree 18 15 18 13 13 13 14 13 12 9 Disagree on the whole 32 35 37 36 34 33 26 32 35 33 Strongly disagree 20 18 19 22 25 29 37 34 35 31 Don't know 5 2 2 3 4 5 8 6 5 8 Most immigrants enrich the cultural life in Norway Strongly agree 36 28 33 34 38 41 47 43 45 43 Agree on the whole 35 39 35 37 35 31 27 35 34 32 Neither agree nor disagree 12 13 13 11 8 13 13 12 9 10 Disagree on the whole 8 12 13 12 10 7 5 5 5 7 Strongly disagree 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 4 Don't know 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 3 4 5 Most immigrants are a cause of insecurity in society Strongly agree 7 9 9 7 8 5 4 4 3 7 Agree on the whole 19 23 18 22 16 15 13 11 11 15 Neither agree nor disagree 15 13 14 12 13 15 12 13 12 10 Disagree on the whole 30 31 33 31 32 28 26 26 34 29 Strongly disagree 27 23 25 26 29 35 43 43 38 37 Don't know 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 All immigrants in Norway should have the same opportunities to have a job as Norwegians Strongly agree 66 58 64 70 70 76 80 77 76 78 Agree on the whole 21 28 24 19 19 15 14 17 16 14 Neither agree nor disagree 5 5 4 3 5 4 3 2 3 3 Disagree on the whole 5 6 4 4 3 2 1 2 3 2 Strongly disagree 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 Don't know 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 Immigrants should make an effort to become as similar to Norwegians as possible Strongly agree 21 23 23 20 20 17 14 14 12 15 Agree on the whole 23 28 26 29 25 24 18 20 19 18 Neither agree nor disagree 15 12 10 11 14 16 18 18 16 15 Disagree on the whole 25 27 27 25 27 24 26 25 30 31 Strongly disagree 15 9 13 13 13 17 21 21 21 18 Don't know 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 Labour immigration from non-Nordic countries makes a mainly positive contribution to Norwegian economy Strongly agree 29 21 26 24 26 34 39 39 38 35 Agree on the whole 37 42 39 44 42 37 33 34 41 39 Neither agree nor disagree 15 16 16 14 12 15 13 15 8 8 Disagree on the whole 9 12 12 12 11 7 6 5 4 6 Strongly disagree 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 1 3 2 Don't know 6 5 3 3 5 5 8 7 6 9 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Attitudes towards the statement that all immigrants in Norway should have the same opportunities to have a job as Norwegians. Per centDownload table as ...Attitudes towards the statement that all immigrants in Norway should have the same opportunities to have a job as Norwegians. Per cent
All immigrants in Norway should have the same opportunities to have a job as Norwegians Strongly agree Agree on the whole Neither agree nor disagree Disagree on the whole Strongly disagree Don't know 1993 58 17 8 7 8 2 1994 53 24 6 9 6 1 1995 57 23 4 9 7 0 1996 67 19 3 6 5 0 1997 66 20 5 5 3 0 1998 76 15 3 4 2 0 1999 73 17 3 4 2 1 2000 74 17 3 3 2 0 2015 66 21 5 5 3 1 2016 58 28 5 6 3 1 2017 64 24 4 4 3 1 2018 70 19 3 4 3 1 2019 70 19 5 3 2 1 2020 76 15 4 2 2 1 2021 80 14 3 1 1 1 2022 77 17 2 2 1 0 2023 76 16 3 3 1 1 2024 78 14 3 2 1 1 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Attitudes towards refugees' and asylum seekers' access to residence permits in Norway. Per centDownload table as ...Attitudes towards refugees' and asylum seekers' access to residence permits in Norway. Per cent
Compared to today, should it be easier, more difficult or remain the same as today? Easier As today More difficult Don't know 2015 15 50 29 5 2016 12 51 33 5 2017 16 52 28 4 2018 15 53 29 3 2019 14 56 23 6 2020 17 56 20 7 2021 20 52 16 12 2022 22 54 12 12 2023 22 58 9 11 2024 18 51 19 13 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Answers to four questions on relation to immigrants. Per centDownload table as ...Answers to four questions on relation to immigrants. Per cent
2024 Would you feel comfortable if you or somone in your close family had an immigrant as home help? Yes (per cent) 92 No (per cent) 6 Don't know (per cent) 2 Would you feel comfortable if you had a doctor who was an immigrant? Yes (per cent) 94 No (per cent) 5 Don't know (per cent) 1 Would you feel comfortable if you had a son or daughter who wanted to marry an immigrant? Yes (per cent) 84 No (per cent) 9 Don't know (per cent) 6 Would you feel comfortable with having an immigrant as a close colleague? Yes (per cent) 95 No (per cent) 4 Don't know (per cent) 1 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Contact with immigrants in different arenas. Per centDownload table as ...Contact with immigrants in different arenas. Per cent
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 All arenas Yes 78 72 78 79 80 79 77 78 80 82 No 21 28 22 21 20 21 23 22 20 18 At work Yes 54 48 52 52 54 54 51 56 55 57 No 46 52 48 48 46 46 48 44 45 42 Among friends and acquaintances Yes 40 37 43 48 39 46 46 42 44 46 No 60 63 57 52 61 54 54 58 56 54 In the neighbourhood Yes 32 32 36 37 37 35 35 30 35 37 No 68 68 64 63 62 65 64 70 65 63 Among close relatives Yes 15 11 14 15 16 18 18 14 19 20 No 85 89 86 85 84 82 82 86 81 80 Through school/studies Yes . . . . . . . 13 17 20 No . . . . . . . 87 83 80 Through activities/organizations Yes . . . . . . . 19 23 24 No . . . . . . . 81 77 76 Other Yes 12 12 14 11 15 14 18 11 11 11 No 88 88 86 89 85 86 82 89 89 89 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ... - Number of arenas where contact with immigrants takes place. Per centDownload table as ...Number of arenas where contact with immigrants takes place. Per cent
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 No contact 21 28 22 21 20 21 23 22 20 18 One arena 34 31 28 29 34 30 27 24 25 23 Two arena 26 22 27 25 23 23 23 24 21 23 Three arenas 10 12 15 18 13 16 16 15 16 15 Four arenas 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 8 10 11 Five arenas 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 4 5 6 Explanation of symbolsDownload table as ...
About the statistics
The information under «About the statistics» was last updated 4 July 2023.
The following instructions have accompanied the questions posed from 1993 to 2000:
“Neither agree, nor disagree” exists as a hidden response alternative, which means that it should not be read to the respondent, but be used if the respondent gives no other answer.
Immigrants
Persons with two foreign-born parents. (For adopted from abroad it is the social, not the biological parents, who count.)
Refugees and asylum seekers
Subgroups within the category “immigrants”. Refugees are persons granted political asylum or have the right to stay on humanitarian grounds. That may be due to having obtained refugee status by the UN High Commissioner or being part of the refugee quota accepted by Norway each year, or they may have come as asylum seekers and granted asylum or right to stay on humanitarian grounds."
In 1998, a supplementary question was added to the four permanent questions. This new question had the following instruction: &“This question very much resembles Innv1 - but here we distinguish between those who want to give residence to more or &“as many” refugees and asylum seekers as today. The question was deliberately placed at a distance behind the other immigrant questions. The idea behind the supplementary question was to investigate how the answers to it deviate from the answers to the question (Innv1): “Norway should give residence to refugees and asylum seekers to at least the same extent as today.”
In 2002 the instruction is being changed to the following:
“An immigrant is a person having two foreign-born parents. For adopted from abroad it is the social, not the biological parents, who count.
Refugees is a subgroup within the category “immigrants”´. A refugee is a person granted asylum. This may happen in several ways. Either by being granted refugee status by the UN High Commissioner or being part of the refugee quota accepted by Norway each year, or by having successfully applied for asylum in Norway. Persons granted right to stay on humanitarian grounds are also covered by the term refugee.
Asylum seeker is a person having applied for asylum in Norway.
Please, also note that the concept refugee in colloquial language often is used about persons who are fleeing infringements of human rights, war, riots or environmental disasters.”
Upon request by an interviewer - in 2003 the first paragraph of the instruction was supplied with these additional sentences: “In the present questions we aim at immigrants with a non-Western background. This should be conveyed if the respondent asks for clarification.”
The current instruction as from 2009 and onwards is as follows:
Definition of concepts
Immigrants
Foreign-born persons registered as resident in Norway having two foreign-born parents. Persons adopted from abroad are not considered immigrants. The attitude questions generally relate to immigrants with national backgrounds from Eastern Europe, Asia (incl. Turkey), Africa and South and Central America. This should be conveyed if the respondent asks for clarification.
Refugees
A subgroup of immigrants who have migrated to the host country due to reasons of flight and have obtained asylum or right to residence on humanitarian grounds. Some are transferred from refugee camps abroad according to agreements with the UN High Commissioner of Refugees. Others have come as asylum seekers.
Asylum seekers
Persons applying for asylum or residence on humanitarian grounds. Their application for residence is still under consideration.
Labour immigration
Immigration accepted on grounds of labour. The Nordic countries have had a common labour market since 1954. As a member of the EEA (European Economic Area), Norway is also obliged to receive labour immigrants from countries within the EU/EEA/EFTA. In May 2004, this area was expanded by 10 new EU countries (Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Cyprus and Malta), and later also Bulgaria and Romania. Beyond that, access to the Norwegian labour market is severely restricted for citizens of other countries. Skilled workers and specialists from &“third countries" may be granted access if they cannot be substituted by labour resident within the area. Persons employed on a short-term basis (less than 6 months) and not registered as residents of the country are also usually included as labour immigrants. Before the ban on immigration was introduced in 1975, labour immigration to Norway was more or less free. The first immigrants from Yugoslavia, Turkey, Morocco, India and Pakistan were labour immigrants.
Name: Attitudes towards immigrants and immigration
Topic: Population
Division for Population Statistics
Whole country, but also broken down at province level.
The statistics were published every October/November from 1993 to 2000. As an exception, the 1994 results were published in January 1995. After a break in 2001, the statistics were resumed in 2002 and published yearly in November/December.
Results have been cited in SOPEMI reports (Continuous Reporting System of Migration of OECD) from Norway.
Depersonalized micro data for both the Omnibus surveys and the Travel and holiday surveys (now: the Travel and social surveys) have been transferred to NSD - Norwegian Centre for Research Data.
The questions were posed for the first time in Statistics Norway’s Omnibus survey in June 1993, and thereafter yearly in the Omnibus for the second quarter (except in 1994 when it was the third quarter) until 2000. Every year, apart from in 2000, a document giving a simple analysis of the results has been published.
From 2005 and onwards the attitude questions were transferred to the third quarter of the Travel and holiday survey (now: the Travel and social surveys), as Statistics Norway decided that year to discontinue its Omnibus survey. In 2007, the analyses of the results were transferred from the series Notater (Documents) to the series Rapporter (Reports).
The relevant ministry responsible for immigrant integration finances the research and uses the data as a basis for evaluating how its policy aimed at immigrants and immigration is being perceived by the population. The media has given considerable coverage to the results.
No external users have access to the statistics and analyses before they are published and accessible simultaneously for all users on ssb.no at 08 am. Prior to this, a minimum of three months' advance notice is given inthe Statistics Release Calendar. This is one of Statistics Norway’s key principles for ensuring that all users are treated equally.
Statistics Act § 10
The Norwegian population aged 16-79 years, registered as resident in Norway. The unit is person.
The data source is now Statistics Norway’s Travel and social survey (previously: Travel and holiday survey). During the years 1993-2004, the Omnibus survey was used.
The net sample size has followed the development of the samples drawn in Statistics Norway’s Omnibus surveys: in 1993-1994 approximately 1 800 persons, 1995-1997 about 1 400 persons, 1998 about 1 200 persons and 1999-2000 about 1 400 persons. By the 2000s, the sample size has fluctuated between 1 400 and 1 100.
The Omnibus surveys and the Travel and social surveys (previously: - holiday surveys) follow Statistics Norway’s general sampling procedures. In the early publications presenting the results of the surveys an appendix containing details about the collection of data has been added. Since 2002, the appendix on data collection has been replaced by some paragraphs at the beginning of the publication rendering the most basic facts about the data collection: units sampled not belonging to the target population, non-response, fieldwork period, possible sample biases etc. For further details, the reader is recommended to consult documentation materials for each specific survey.
Total interview time is cited in the document/report, but not for each separate part of the survey.
Nothing is ever published that makes it possible to detect the identity of the respondents.
Questions that have been kept unaltered, allow for comparisons over time.
The documentation reports from the surveys include paragraphs on data collection and processing errors. They also present data on non-response and sampling bias in connection with known parameters, such as sex, age, and province.
From 2008 and onwards a part of the above mentioned documentation has been presented in the data chapter in the same reports that present the findings from the surveys on attitudes towards immigrants and immigration. Here is also exposed how the educational level distribute among the respondents in the net sample compared to the corresponding distribution in the gross sample. In 2010 the difference between the two distributions had grown so large that a weight was constructed to eliminate the bias in the educational distribution of the net sample. The results in 2010 and consecutive years have been presented with this weight activated.
