RETAILERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS CROSS- BORDER TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Transcription

1 Flash Eurobarometer 359 RETAILERS ATTITUDES TOWARDS CROSS- BORDER TRADE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION SUMMARY Fieldwork: September - October 2012 Publication: June 2013 This survey has been requested by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Health and Consumers and co-ordinated by Directorate-General for Communication. This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission. The interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors. Flash Eurobarometer TNS Political & Social

2 Flash Eurobarometer 359 Retailers attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection Conducted by TNS Political & Social at the request of the European Commission, Directorate-General for Health and Consumers Survey co-ordinated by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Communication (DG COMM Research and Speechwriting Unit)

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 2 I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RETAILERS SURVEYED... 4 II. CROSS-BORDER TRADE IN THE INTERNAL MARKET... 6 III. INFORMATION AND AWARENESS OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS TOWARDS CONSUMERS... 9 IV. COMPLIANCE WITH CONSUMER AND PRODUCT SAFETY LEGISLATION V. AWARENESS AND USE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) BODIES TO SETTLE DISPUTES WITH CONSUMERS ANNEXES Technical specifications 1

4 INTRODUCTION This summary presents the results of the Flash Eurobarometer survey Retailers' attitudes towards cross-border trade and consumer protection, carried out in September and October This survey is part of a series of consumer protection surveys targeting retailers that have been conducted since 2006 by the European Commission, DG SANCO (Flash Eurobarometers 331 (2011), 300 (2010), 278 (2009) 224 (2008) and 186 (2006) 1. Understanding conditions for consumers across the EU is fundamental to delivering on the European Commission's aims to improve the business and consumer environment by deepening the single market and enforcing single market and competition rules. With 27 Member States the internal market of the EU has the potential to be the largest retail market in the world, however this potential has yet to be realised. The internal EU market remains fragmented, and most retailers only sell to domestic consumers due to actual and perceived barriers to cross-border selling 2. In order to build a sound knowledge base to inform both policy-making and the regulation of the single market, the European Commission regularly monitors markets and national consumer conditions and assesses business attitudes toward cross-border trade and consumer protection through a range of research. This research and other sources of information are used to produce the spring edition of the Consumer Markets Scoreboards 3, which monitors Member States' consumer conditions, integration of the single market and the development of e-commerce. The present survey is designed to support this knowledge base by investigating the perceptions and experiences of European retailers in the following areas: Characteristics of retailers in terms of channels used, and languages used to sell to consumers Development of, and obstacles to, cross-border commerce Awareness of legal obligations towards consumers Knowledge of and compliance with consumer and product safety legislation Use of alternative dispute resolution bodies. This Flash Eurobarometer was carried out by TNS Political & Social. It was conducted in the 27 EU Member States and Croatia, Norway and Iceland. The interviews were carried out by telephone between 20 September and 22 October All reports can be found at

5 The target companies were defined as retailers that sell goods or services directly to end consumers and employ at least 10 people. Eligible respondents, including those working in commercial activities, were individuals with decision-making responsibilities 4. In each country around 400 retailers were interviewed, with the exception of Cyprus (150), Luxembourg (150), Malta (151) and Iceland (150). In those four countries, the margin of errors is therefore higher than in the other countries surveyed (as explained in the technical specifications). Note: In this report, countries are referred to by their official abbreviation. The abbreviations used in this report correspond to: ABBREVIATIONS BE Belgium LV Latvia CZ Czech Republic LU Luxembourg BG Bulgaria HU Hungary DK Denmark MT Malta DE Germany NL The Netherlands EE Estonia AT Austria EL Greece PL Poland ES Spain PT Portugal FR France RO Romania IE Ireland SI Slovenia IT Italy SK Slovakia CY Republic of Cyprus* FI Finland LT Lithuania SE Sweden UK The United Kingdom IS Iceland NO Norway HR Croatia * Cyprus as a whole is one of the 27 European Union Member States. However, the acquis communautaire has been suspended in the part of the country which is not controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus. For practical reasons, only the interviews carried out in the part of the country controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus are included in the CY category and in the EU27 average. * * * * * We wish to thank all the people interviewed who took the time to participate in this survey. Without their active participation, this survey would not have been possible. The Eurobarometer web site can be consulted at the following address: 4 Whenever a company was eligible the selected respondent had to be someone with decision making responsibilities in the company (managing director, CEO) or leading the commercial activities of the company (Commercial managers, sales managers, marketing managers). When there are several decision-makers, the respondent selects oneself. 3

6 I. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RETAILERS SURVEYED 1. NUMBER AND TYPE OF RETAIL CHANNELS USED Retailers 5 are now more likely to sell via E- commerce/internet Direct sales via shops continue to be the most used retail channel, although use of E-commerce/internet is increasing - up 10 percentage points to 51% since Distance sales continue to increase (up 8 percentage points to 61%), predominantly driven by this increased use of E-commerce/internet. The larger the retailer, the more likely they are to use at least one distance sales channel, and the higher the average number of distance channels used. Base: All retailers n=10,060 7 Retailers sales channels: E-commerce/Internet 8 -% Base: All retailers n=10,060 As the overall EU results suggest, retailers in most EU countries have increased their use of E-commerce and internet sales channels since Base: All retailers n=10,060 6 All the differences across time, between countries and between socio-demographic categories commented on in this report can be considered statistically significant at 95% security level. 7 This represents the weighted number of actual interviews (it is the case in all the report when we show the base size) 8 D2 Do you use the following sales channels for retail? (MULTIPLE ANSWERS POSSIBLE) 4

7 The largest increases are seen amongst retailers in Malta (up 26 percentage points), Spain (+20), Cyprus (+19), Latvia (+18), France and Finland (both +16). In contrast Austria and Ireland are now less likely than in 2011 to use E-commerce/internet sales channels: in Austria reported use by retailers has declined by 6 percentage points while in Ireland by 4 percentage points. 2. SELLING IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES Most retailers only sell in their country's language (55%), however 45% use at least two languages, 24% sell in at least 3 languages and 12% sell in 4 or more. Retailers in Ireland and the UK are the least likely to trade in more than one language. 91% of those in Ireland and 88% of those in the UK say they only sell to final consumers in their country's language. This is a sharp contrast to retailers in Cyprus, where 93% sell in at least one other EU language. In fact overall at least half of all retailers in 16 EU countries 9, as well as in Croatia, Iceland and Norway sell to consumers in at least one other EU language, as well as the language of their country. Base: All retailers n=10,060 9 SK, FI, SI, RO, PT, LT, CZ, AT, LV, EE, ES, LU, EL, BG, SE, CY 5

8 II. CROSS-BORDER TRADE IN THE INTERNAL MARKET 1. CURRENT LEVEL OF CROSS-BORDER SALES One quarter (25%) of retailers sell to consumers in at least one other EU country. Slightly more than one out of ten (12%) sell to four or more countries, 6% to 2-3 countries and 7% make cross-border sales to consumers in one other EU country. The proportion of retailers who sell to consumers in at least one foreign country has decreased slightly since 2011 (-2 percentage points). Seven out of ten retailers only sell to consumers within their own country (71%). Base: All retailers n=10,060 Comparison across Member States and other countries shows that retailers in Belgium (45%), Luxembourg (42%), Slovenia (41%) and Greece (40%) are the most likely to sell to consumers in at least on other EU country. At the other end of the scale, in 8 countries less than one fifth of retailers sell to consumers in another EU country: Norway (6%), Finland (11%), the UK (13%), Poland (14%), France (15%), Romania (17%), and Italy and Iceland (both 18%). D5 To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers? A cross-border sale is a sale to a final consumer resident in a different EU Member State from that of the seller, through ecommerce/internet, mail order (by post), telesales/call center, representatives visiting consumers at their homes. Sales in physical points of sale do not qualify as cross-border sales to final consumers. 6

9 2. OBSTACLES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF CROSS-BORDER SALES Base: All retailers n=10,060 Costs of compliance with different consumer rules and contract law (41%), and potentially higher costs of fraud and non-payment (41%) are the most mentioned obstacles to cross-border trade development. Mentions of these obstacles have increased by seven and nine percentage points respectively. Extra costs arising from language differences are the least mentioned obstacle (25%, +5 points since 2011). The chart below illustrates that since 2011 the perceived importance of each of these obstacles has increased 10. This is particularly the case for the potential higher costs of fraud and non-payment, higher cost of cross-border delivery, restrictions on cross-border sales imposed by manufacturers or suppliers, and the extra costs from after-sales service (all +9 percentage points). 10 For those included in both waves of the survey 7

10 Base: All retailers n=10, PLANS TO SELL CROSS-BORDER IN THE NEXT YEAR One quarter (24%) of all retailers plan to sell cross-border to consumers in another EU country within the next 12 months. Although 8% of retailers do not currently sell cross-border but plan to do so within the next 12 months, 9% of retailers are currently selling cross-border but don t plan to do it in the next 12 months Around one in five retailers in Iceland (20%) and Croatia (18%) do not currently sell cross-border, but plan to within the next 12 months. Within the EU, retailers in Malta are the most likely to be planning to start cross-border sales (15%), followed by those in Greece, Luxembourg (both 14%) and Slovenia (13%). On the other hand, 2% of Norwegian, 4% of Italian and 5% of Cypriot retailers fall into this category. Retailers who do not currently sell cross-border but plan to do so within the next 12 months -% Base: All retailers n=10,060 8

11 III. INFORMATION AND AWARENESS OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS TOWARDS CONSUMERS The level of information and awareness of legal obligations towards consumers has generally remained stable. 1. SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF CONSUMER LEGISLATION 1.1. Period for return of defective products Fewer than one third (29%) of retailers know the correct 11 length of time consumers have to request a defective product be repaired, although this is an increase of three percentage points since Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product Base: All retailers n=10, The consumer has the right to ask for a defective product to be repaired... CORRECT ANSWERS: - Within 2 years from the date of the original purchase (except for the Netherlands, Finland, Ireland and the United Kingdom) - Within a minimum of 2 years from the date of the original purchase and longer for some products (in the Netherlands and in Finland) - Within 6 years from the date of the original purchase (in the UK except Scotland, and in Ireland) - Within 5 years from the date of the original purchase (in Scotland) 9

12 There is considerable variation in retailers' knowledge between different countries. For example, Denmark is the only country where an absolute majority of retailers know the correct answer (53%). The lowest levels of knowledge are observed in the UK (4%) and Ireland (7%) where consumers have a longer legal period in which to return defective products than in other countries Prohibited commercial practices Almost seven out of ten retailers (68%) are aware that it is prohibited to call a product free if it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number. Knowledge in this area has improved six percentage points since More than half (56%) know that advertising products with a very low price in comparison to other offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale is prohibited. This knowledge has increased slightly since 2009 (+3 percentage points) Just over half (53%) correctly say it is prohibited to include an invoice or similar document seeking payment in marketing material. This represents an increase of five percentage points since Slightly more than six out of ten retailers (61%) incorrectly believe that it is prohibited to make exaggerated claims in an advertisement - only 34% know that this is not prohibited. Base: All retailers n=10,060 10

13 2. SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF PRODUCT SAFETY LEGISLATION An absolute majority of retailers still think that a small number of both food and non-food products are unsafe At least six out of ten retailers selling non-food products think that a small number of non-food products are unsafe (63%), while among those selling food products this proportion is of 57%, and there has been no significant change in these results since 2011.Retailers are more likely to think that food products are safe (24%) than they are for non-food products (14%). Almost one in five (19%) retailers selling non-food products think a significant number of non-food products are unsafe, while 14% of those selling food products think this about food products. There have been few changes since 2011, the largest one being a decrease of three percentage points in the proportion of retailers who think that all food products are safe (27%). Bases: Q11: Retailers who sell non-food products n=4,623; Q12: Retailers who sell food products n=3, Bases used for those questions in 2012 are slightly different compared to previous surveys. Results for previous surveys are shown for all retailers but those spontaneously answering not relevant ; whereas, in the 11

14 3. FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT CONSUMER LEGISLATION IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY AND IN ANOTHER EU COUNTRY Most retailers know where to find information and advice about consumer legislation in their own country, but are much less confident about finding this information for other EU countries. 85% agree that they know where to get information and advice about consumer legislation in their own country. But fewer than four out of ten (38%) agree they know where to find information and advice relating consumer legislation in other EU countries. Base: All retailers n=10,060 At least seven out of ten retailers in all countries say they know where to get information and advice about consumer legislation in their own country. Agreement is almost universal amongst retailers in Estonia (96%), the UK, Romania (both 91%), Austria and Finland (both 90%). In contrast, agreement is lowest in Cyprus, Croatia and Iceland, but even here 74%, 76% and 76% respectively agree. Knowledge of where to get information and advice about consumer legislation in other EU countries is far less widespread. In this case an absolute majority of retailers in only three countries agree that they know where to find this information and advice: Luxembourg (56%), Romania (55%) and Malta (50%). At the other end of the scale 20% of Icelandic and 28% of Swedish and Norwegian retailers say the same survey, these questions have been asked only to retailers answering they sell non-food or food products in D3. 12

15 IV. COMPLIANCE WITH CONSUMER AND PRODUCT SAFETY LEGISLATION 1. INCIDENCE OF NON-COMPLIANCE Almost all retailers say they comply with consumer legislation (98%, unchanged since 2011). In fact, most retailers 'strongly agree' that they comply with consumer legislation (69%). Retailers are, however, less confident about their competitors, with just over two thirds (68%) agreeing that their competitors comply with consumer legislation. This represents a slight decline in the proportion agreeing since 2009 (-2 percentage points). Base: All retailers n=10,060 In terms of overall agreement, retailers in Finland (83%), Luxembourg (82%), Ireland and the UK (81%) are most likely to think their competitors comply with consumer legislation. In contrast, general agreement levels are much lower in Croatia (47%) and Bulgaria (49%). Retailers in Finland are the most likely to 'strongly' agree that their competitors comply with consumer legislation (46%), considerably higher than those in Germany and Norway (both 36%). At the other end of the scale 6% of Polish and 7% of Lithuanian retailers 'strongly agree'. 13

16 Compliance with consumer legislation competitors of respondents - %EU 13 Base: All retailers n=10,060 In the last 12 months 15% retailers have seen fraudulent advertisements from their competitors that attempt to get money without selling anything. This represents a decline of eight percentage points since Base: All retailers n=10, Q3.2 Now, thinking about consumer legislation, please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements. Let me confirm once more that all responses are strictly anonymous. Your competitors comply with consumer legislation 14

17 Retailers are more likely to say that they have come across misleading or deceptive advertisements. One third (33%) of retailers say they have seen misleading or deceptive ads, statements or offers from their competitors in the last 12 months - an increase of 8 percentage points since 2010, and the highest level in the period Base: All retailers n=10, TRUST IN ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS Almost the half (45%) of retailers trust the claims of competitors about the environmental impact of their products always or in most of the cases. One in ten say they always trust them (10%), 35% trust them in most cases while 30% trust them only in some cases. Base: All retailers n=10,060 15

18 3. ENFORCEMENT AND MARKET SURVEILLANCE Product safety checks by authorities have decreased since 2011 Checks by retailers (45%) and authorities (43%) on the safety of products are the most commonly experienced safety actions. Product safety checks by authorities have decreased by seven percentage points since % of retailers report being asked by the authorities to withdraw or recall a product over the previous two years, while 12% report receiving a complaint from a consumer about product safety (-5 percentage points since 2011). Less than one in ten (8%) have been asked by authorities to issue a public warning about the safety of any products they were selling. Base: Retailers who sell non-food products (filtered on D3) n=4, Bases used in 2012 are slightly different compared to previous surveys. Results for the 2010 survey are shown for every retailer providing an answer (excluding those spontaneously answering not relevant ); whereas results for the 2012 and 2011 surveys are filtered on question D3, to focus exclusively on retailers answering they sell non-food products in D3. FL359 (2012): Q13 asked only to retailers answering they sell non-food products in D3, with no possibility to answer not relevant in Q13; FL331 (2011): Retailers answering they sell non-food products in D3 but answering not relevant in Q13 were as well excluded from the base; FL300 (2010): Respondents answering not relevant have been systematically excluded, as there was no possibility of filtering this question on D3 in this survey. *In 2010, item Any other enforcement action related to product safety was labelled Other action 16

19 4. PERCEIVED COMPLIANCE MONITORING OF CONSUMER AND PRODUCT SAFETY LEGISLATION Almost nine out of ten retailers think that public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation 86% of retailers who sell food products agree that public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with food safety legislation while 82% of retailers who sell non-food products agree that public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation for their sector. More than three quarters of retailers (76%) agree that public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in their sector, and 64% agree that self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conduct or codes of practice in their sector (+4 percentage points since 2011). Almost the same proportion (62%) agrees that consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation (+5 percentage points since 2011). 53% agree that the media regularly report on businesses which fail to respect consumer legislation, although less than a fifth said they have changed their commercial practices as a result of a media story (18%). Bases: All retailers n=10, *Only for this item and for the 2012 and 2011 survey, base: Retailers who sell food products (filtered on D3) n=3,843 **Only for this item and for the 2012 and 2011 survey, base: Retailers who sell non-food products (filtered on D3) n=4, Bases used in 2012 are slightly different compared to previous surveys. Results for the 2011 and 2010 surveys are shown for every retailer providing an answer (i.e. excluding those that considered the question not applicable); whereas results for the 2012 survey show results for all retailers, not applicable being not an option anymore. (see more explanation in the report) 17

20 V. AWARENESS AND USE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) BODIES TO SETTLE DISPUTES WITH CONSUMERS Over half of European retailers know of Alternative Dispute Resolution bodies. Out of these, more than one in ten have used it in the past two years Just over half of European retailers know an ADR body (53%), with 11% actually being members of an ADR body. In the past two years only 12% of retailers who know of ADR bodies say they have used an ADR body for settling disputes with consumers. Base: All retailers n=10, Base: Retailers knowing any ADR bodies n=5, In Finland and Sweden, the question was formulated slightly differently. In Finland: Do you know any Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) bodies (i.e. Consumer Disputes Boards, arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-court dispute resolution bodies) for settling disputes with consumers in (OUR COUNTRY)? ; In Sweden: Do you know any out-of court dispute resolution bodies (i.e. arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer dispute boards, other out-of-court dispute resolution bodies) for settling disputes with consumers in (OUR COUNTRY)?, with item 1 being Yes, and your industry is covered by the public system for consumer dispute resolution and item 2 Yes and your industry has its own dispute resolution body. 17 In Finland and Sweden, the question was formulated slightly differently: In the past two years, have you used any Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) bodies (i.e. Consumer Disputes Boards, arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-court dispute resolution bodies) for settling disputes with consumers? 18

21 Looking at the results for all retailers shows that they are now less likely to have used an ADR body that at any time in the period , but the variations are small. There has been a three percentage points decrease in the use of ADRs relative to the largest difference in the period. Base: All retailers n=10, Question used in 2012 is different compared to previous surveys. Until 2011, retailers were able to choose between six answers: No, but you know some ADR mechanisms, No, and you do not know any of those mechanisms, No, but you are member of an ADR body, Yes, you have used ADR mechanisms, Yes, you regularly use those mechanisms and Yes, through the ADR body you are a member of. In 2012, there were only three ones: No, Yes, several times and Yes, once or twice. Base used in 2012 is also different. Whereas until 2011 this question was asked to all retailers, it is now filtered on Q15 and asked only to retailers knowing ADR bodies. In order to compare 2012 results with previous surveys, data were recalculated on all retailers, making possible to compare the Total Yes answers. 19

22 ANNEXES

23 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

24 FLASH EUROBAROMETER 359 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Between the 20 th of September and the 22 nd of October 2012, TNS Political & Social, a consortium created between TNS political & social, TNS UK and TNS opinion, carried out the survey FLASH EUROBAROMETER 359 about Retailers Attitudes towards Cross-Border Trade and Consumer Protection. This survey has been requested by the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Directorate-General for Health and Consumers. It is a general public survey co-ordinated by the Directorate-General for Communication ( Research and Speechwriting Unit). The FLASH EUROBAROMETER 359 covers businesses selling to final consumers in the retail and service sectors employing 10 or more persons in the European Union (NACE : G, H, I, J, K, excluding G 51 Wholesale trade and commission trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles; J 67 Activities auxiliary to financial intermediation; K73 Research and development; K74 Other business activities). It was also conducted in Norway, Iceland and Croatia where the same target group was interviewed. All interviews were carried using the TNS e-call center (our centralized CATI system). The lists of companies qualified to be interviewed were developed by Bureau van Dijk in most countries. In the UK, Spain, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus, it was developed by Dun and Bradstreet. In some countries including Ireland and Malta, the sample lists were completed by national institutes using local statistical data sources. Whenever a company was eligible the selected respondent had to be someone with decision making responsibilities in the company (managing director, CEO) or leading the commercial activities of the company (Commercial managers, sales managers, marketing managers). Quotas were applied on both company size (using three different ranges: employees, employees and 250 employees or more) and sectors (Trade versus services). These quotas were adjusted according to the country s universe but were also reasoned in order to ensure that the sample was large enough in every cell. TS1

25 For each country a comparison between the sample and the universe was carried out. The Universe description was derived from Eurostat population data or from national statistics offices. For all countries surveyed, a national weighting procedure, using marginal and intercellular weighting, was carried out based on this Universe description. In all countries, sectors and size of company were introduced in the iteration procedure. For international weighting (i.e. EU averages), TNS Opinion & Social applies the official population figures as provided by EUROSTAT or national statistic offices. The total population figures for input in this post-weighting procedure are listed above. Readers are reminded that survey results are estimations, the accuracy of which, everything being equal, rests upon the sample size and upon the observed percentage. With samples of about 400 interviews, the real percentages vary within the following confidence limits: Observed percentages 10% or 90% 20% or 80% 30% or 70% 40% or 60% 50% Confidence limits ± 2.9 points ± 3.9 points ± 4.5 points ± 4.8 points ± 4.9 points The values in the table are the margin of error at 95% confidence level for a given survey estimate and sample size: TS2

26 ABBR. COUNTRIES INSTITUTES N INTERVIEWS FIELDWORK DATES POPULATION BE Belgium TNS Dimarso /09/ /10/ BG Bulgaria TNS BBSS /09/ /10/ CZ Czech Rep. TNS Aisa s.r.o /09/ /10/ DK Denmark TNS Gallup A/S /09/ /10/ DE Germany TNS Infratest /09/ /10/ EE Estonia TNS Emor /09/ /10/ EL Greece TNS ICAP /09/ /10/ ES Spain TNS Demoscopia S.A /09/ /10/ FR France TNS Sofres /09/ /10/ IE Ireland IMS Millward Brown /09/ /10/ IT Italy TNS Infratest /09/ /10/ CY Rep. of Cyprus CYMAR /09/ /10/ LV Latvia TNS Latvia /09/ /10/ LT Lithuania TNS Lithuania /09/2012 9/10/ LU Luxembourg TNS Dimarso /09/ /10/ HU Hungary TNS Hoffmann Kft /09/ /10/ MT Malta MISCO International /09/2012 5/10/2012 Ltd NL Netherlands TNS NIPO /09/ /10/ AT Austria TNS Austria /09/ /10/ PL Poland TNS OBOP /09/ /10/ PT Portugal TNS EUROTESTE /09/ /10/ RO Romania TNS CSOP /09/ /10/ SI Slovenia RM PLUS /09/ /10/ SK Slovakia TNS AISA Slovakia /09/ /10/ FI Finland TNS Gallup Oy /09/ /10/ SE Sweden TNS SIFO /09/ /10/ UK United Kingdom TNS UK /09/ /10/ TOTAL EU /09/ /10/ HR Croatia Hendal /09/ /10/ IS Iceland Capacent ehf /09/ /10/ NW Norway TNS Gallup AS /09/ /10/ TOTAL /09/ /10/ TS3