Public Opinion in Numbers: Global Attitudes Toward Refuge and Border Control in 2026

Baseline Empathy Remains Strong

At the core of this sociological landscape lies a surprisingly resilient bed of human empathy. Across the 29 nations surveyed, 66% of respondents agreed that people escaping war or violent persecution should be permitted to seek safety in another country. This figure, virtually unchanged from 67% in 2025, demonstrates remarkable endurance despite years of economic volatility, rising living costs, and intense media coverage surrounding border flashpoints. While current sentiment has naturally receded from the historic peak of 78% recorded in 2022 during the initial wave of Ukrainian displacement, the fundamental principle of international sanctuary remains widely endorsed across diverse cultures and continents.

Geographic and Cultural Divergence

However, beneath this broad global average lies a rich tapestry of national variations, shaped by local history, geography, and political rhetoric.

Compassion for refugees reaches its zenith in Northern and Western Europe, where 78% of citizens in both Sweden and the Netherlands endorse the right to seek asylum. Spain, standing directly at the frontline of Mediterranean maritime crossings, displays a remarkably high level of public empathy, with 76% of Spanish respondents affirming the necessity of offering refuge.

In contrast, those in Hungary and Poland tend to show the least support among EU countries, at 54% each.

Opinions on how countries should deal with refugees vary significantly. For instance, more than half of the Hungarian, Belgian, and German respondents claim that their country should close the borders to refugees entirely and not accept any refugees at this time.

Perhaps even more fascinating are the dramatic long-term shifts observed in countries that historically maintained rigid perspectives. In France, support for offering refuge has climbed steadily over seven years, rising from 43%  in 2019 to 68% in 2026. An even more dramatic transformation occurred in Japan, where public backing for asylum jumped from23%  in 2019 to 64% in 2026, illustrating how national discourse and heightened awareness of global conflicts can reshape public attitudes over time.

Regional Caution and Resistance

Conversely, public sentiment remains considerably more cautious in other regions, particularly in parts of East Asia where historical isolation, strict immigration controls, and distinct civic models prevail. In South Korea, only 44% of respondents support the principle of offering refuge to those fleeing violence, while in Singapore, support stands at 47%. These stark contrasts highlight that while the ideal of universal humanitarian protection is celebrated in international treaties, its perception on the ground is deeply mediated by national identity, economic expectations, and the perceived capacity of local social security systems.

The most compelling finding of the 2026 sociological data, however, is not the variation between nations, but the profound internal duality present within individual citizens. The research reveals that holding a strong belief in the moral right to safety does not prevent people from harboring deep anxieties about border control and institutional integrity. Globally, 61% of respondents expressed skepticism regarding the motives of asylum seekers, indicating a belief that a significant portion of those applying for refugee status are seeking economic opportunities or social welfare access rather than escaping direct persecution.

More than six in 10 respondents in Germany and Ireland believe that most refugees just want to come to their countries for economic reasons or to take advantage of the country's welfare services, while respondents in Sweden and Italy tend to agree the least with that idea.

Policy Fault Lines and Border Control

This tension creates a delicate social balance where public sympathy is constantly weighed against concerns over fairness and legal order.

This division extends directly into practical policy questions regarding borders, integration, and cultural contribution. When asked whether national borders should be entirely closed to refugees, global opinion fractured into near-equal halves, with 49% advocating for closed borders compared to 41% who disagreed. Views on social integration reflect a similar fault line: 44% of global respondents expressed confidence that refugees would successfully integrate into their host communities, while 45% remained pessimistic. Furthermore, when assessing the overall societal impact, 39% believed that refugees make a positive contribution to their host nation, whereas 47% held the opposite view. These numbers underscore that public apprehension is rarely rooted in outright hostility toward vulnerable individuals, but rather in doubt regarding whether host institutions possess the resources and skill to manage large-scale demographic shifts.

This ideological landscape is further complicated by a distinct generational divide that promises to shape future policy debate. Younger generations demonstrate a significantly more open and optimistic perspective on migration than their older counterparts. Among Generation Z respondents, born between 1997 and 2012, 49% expressed confidence in the successful integration of refugees, compared to 39% of Baby Boomers born between 1946 and 1964. Furthermore, Generation Z displays lower levels of overall skepticism, with 54% questioning the motives of asylum seekers compared to 61%–66% among older age cohorts. Only 45% of Generation Z supported complete border closures, whereas older demographics favoured border restrictions at rates between 49% and 51%.

At the same time, public expectations regarding who should carry the primary responsibility for refugee assistance are undergoing a notable evolution. Historically, citizens looked heavily toward wealthy developed nations to finance and accommodate displaced populations. However, the 2026 data shows a shift toward localized and non-governmental actors. The proportion of respondents expecting wealthier countries to bear the primary burden fell from 30% in 2025 to 21% in 2026. In contrast, support for local non-governmental organizations grew to 28%, up from 23%, while reliance on home governments rose to 20% from 16%.

Bridging Compassion and Governance