MOSCOW, 6 June 2024. Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) presents the findings of a survey among Russians about the BRICS.
BRICS…sounds strong!
BRICS is an intergovernmental organization comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, set up in 2006. This year another group of countries joined the BRICS block: Egypt, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Ethiopia. On 1 January the chair passed to Russia; in October, a summit of states, a major event, will take place in Kazan.
Russian awareness of the BRICS bloc has risen from 85% in 2015 to the current 97%. Besides, an overwhelming majority of Russians point to an increased role of the BRICS nations worldwide (57%, +19 p.p. compared to 2015). The percentage of Russians who consider that the influence of the BRICS countries is weak has not changed (2015, 2024 –29%, each).
|
Economy, finance, and security
Finance and economy are viewed as key areas of cooperation for Russia: deepening of economic and business ties (44%) and launching a single financial market (37%).
|
Every third Russian (32%) prioritizes cooperation in international security and military and technical cooperation. Remarkably, women are more likely to prioritize this area than men (37% vs. 27%). Interest in cooperation in this area grows with age (11% of the 18-24-year-olds and 41% of those aged 60).
Fighting international terrorism (18%), developing science and technologies (17%) and energy market (16%) are seen as least important. A further 5% pay attention to simplifying visa procedures.
However, younger Russians view those areas as more promising. Science and technology is important for 35% of the 18-24-year-olds (vs 12% of those aged 60+). The same can be said about energy sector (23% of the 18-24-year-olds vs 12% of those aged 60+). Young respondents are more interested in simplified visa procedures with the BRICS countries (13% of the 18–24-year-olds vs. 2% of those aged 60+).
Tourism
The findings reveal that China is ranked first in terms of tourism (78%), followed by the United Arab Emirates (63%) and Brazil (57%). Tourist Interest Index[1] is at 80, 67 and 63 points (respectively). Findings of other VCIOMs surveys where Russians highly appreciated Russia-China relations and showed interest in the Chinese culture confirm this trend. Slightly less attractive countries are Ethiopia (43% showed low interest), Iran (38%) and South Africa (33%).
Almost all the BRICS countries, excluding Egypt, turned out to be hardly accessible or inaccessible for tourism, according to respondents’ assessments. The list of the most accessible countries is headed by Egypt (32% say it is “highly accessible”), followed by China (25%), India and the United Arab Emirates (18%, each). Tourist Attractiveness Index for these countries is at 39, 34 and 28 points (respectively). Most inaccessible countries are Brazil (70% pointed out “low accessibility”), South Africa (68%) and Ethiopia (64%).
“VCIOM Online” online nationwide survey was conducted May 19 through 21, 2024. Methodology: online probability panel survey, stratified random sample. Panel participants were recruited through all-Russia daily CATI surveys via random digit dial (RDD) from a complete list of mobile phone numbers in use in Russia. The data were weighted for socio-demographic characteristics. The margin of error at a 95% confidence level does not exceed 2.5%. In addition to sampling error, minor changes to the wording of questions and different circumstances arising during the fieldwork can introduce bias into the survey.
Please evaluate the influence of the BRICS group on the global stage (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia) (close-ended question, one answer, % of total respondents) | ||
| 2015* | 2024 |
Likely strong influence | 38 | 57 |
Likely weak influence | 29 | 29 |
This is the first time I hear about this organization | 15 | 3 |
Don’t know /hard to evaluate | 18 | 11 |
Please evaluate the influence of the BRICS group on the global stage (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia) (close-ended question, one answer, % of total respondents) | ||||||||
| Total | Men | Women | Ages 18-24 | 25-34 | 35-44 | 45-59 | 60 + |
Likely strong influence | 57 | 57 | 56 | 51 | 47 | 54 | 61 | 63 |
Likely weak influence | 29 | 34 | 26 | 34 | 33 | 29 | 26 | 29 |
This is the first time I hear about this organization | 3 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 1 |
Don’t know /hard to evaluate | 11 | 8 | 14 | 9 | 15 | 12 | 11 | 7 |
What areas of cooperation with the BRICS countries do you consider to be top priority for Russia? You can choose 1 or 2 areas (close-ended question, up to 2 answers % of total respondents) | ||||||||
| Total | Men | Women | Ages 18-24 | 25-34 | 35-44 | 45-59 | 60 + |
Deepening of economic, business ties | 44 | 49 | 40 | 46 | 40 | 42 | 47 | 43 |
Launching a single financial market | 37 | 41 | 33 | 21 | 25 | 35 | 41 | 46 |
Joint effort in international security, military and technical cooperation | 32 | 27 | 37 | 11 | 24 | 33 | 35 | 41 |
Cooperation in fighting international terrorism | 18 | 12 | 23 | 15 | 13 | 20 | 18 | 18 |
Joint science and technology projects | 17 | 21 | 14 | 35 | 22 | 17 | 15 | 12 |
Cooperation in energy sector (oil, gas) | 16 | 17 | 16 | 23 | 21 | 17 | 16 | 12 |
Simplifying/loosening visa procedures | 5 | 7 | 4 | 13 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Projects in education and culture | 4 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
Humanitarian aid to the countries in need | 2 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
Closer cooperation in sport | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
Other | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Don’t know | 8 | 5 | 10 | 9 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
Please assess how interesting or not interesting for you the following countries are in terms of tourism, using a 5-point scale, with 5 being “very interesting”, and 1 being “not at all interesting”. (close-ended question, one answer in each line, % of total respondents) | |||||
| High interest | Average interest | Low interest | Don’t know | Tourist Interest Index** |
China | 78 | 11 | 9 | 2 | 80 |
United Arab Emirates | 63 | 17 | 17 | 3 | 67 |
Brazil | 57 | 21 | 19 | 3 | 63 |
Egypt | 53 | 24 | 21 | 2 | 61 |
India | 51 | 20 | 26 | 3 | 59 |
Saudi Arabia | 46 | 22 | 28 | 4 | 54 |
South Africa | 38 | 24 | 33 | 5 | 49 |
Iran | 37 | 21 | 38 | 4 | 46 |
Ethiopia | 24 | 28 | 43 | 5 | 39 |
** Index is calculated as the sum of the shares of answers normalized for the scale from 0 to 100. The answer “1” corresponds to coefficient 0; “2” corresponds to 0.25: “3” corresponds to 0.5; “4” corresponds to 0.75: “5” corresponds to 1.
Please assess how accessible or not accessible for your family the following countries are in terms of traveling, using a 5-point scale, with 5 being “quite accessible”, and 1 being “not at all accessible”. (close-ended question, one answer in each line, % of total respondents) | |||||
| High accessibility | Average accessibility | Low accessibility | Don’t know | Tourist Accessibility Index *** |
Egypt | 32 | 14 | 47 | 7 | 39 |
China | 25 | 15 | 53 | 7 | 34 |
India | 18 | 16 | 57 | 9 | 28 |
United Arab Emirates | 18 | 13 | 62 | 7 | 26 |
Iran | 13 | 14 | 60 | 13 | 22 |
Saudi Arabia | 12 | 13 | 62 | 13 | 21 |
Ethiopia | 10 | 11 | 64 | 15 | 18 |
Brazil | 9 | 11 | 70 | 10 | 18 |
South Africa | 9 | 11 | 68 | 12 | 17 |
*** Index is calculated as the sum of the shares of answers normalized for the scale from 0 to 100. The answer “1” corresponds to coefficient 0; “2” corresponds to 0.25: “3” corresponds to 0.5; “4” corresponds to 0.75: “5” corresponds to 1.
* Before 2017, surveys were conducted through household face-to-face interviews (“Express” project); stratified multi-stage quota-based sample; quotas based on socio-demographic parameters, representative of the Russian population aged 18+ by settlement type, sex, gender, education and federal district. Sample size: 1,600 respondents.
[1] Index is calculated as the sum of the shares of answers normalized for the scale from 0 to 100. The answer “1” corresponds to coefficient 0; “2” corresponds to 0.25: “3” corresponds to 0.5; “4” corresponds to 0.75: “5” corresponds to 1.