Have Swedes' values become more or less liberal?

Depends on the dimension. Acceptance of LGBTQ, gender equality and divorce has risen markedly (WVS). Institutional trust has been stable. Immigration attitudes follow a U-curve. No single ‘liberalisation trend’ explains all movements.

Has the importance of religion risen?

Not in WVS's published Swedish figures: 29.2 % (1996), 29.2 % (2006) and 26.2 % (2011) answered very or rather important. 1990 and 2017–2020 are EVS surveys not included in WVS's results tables.

Are attitudes to immigration harder now than before?

According to SOM, 61 % thought receiving fewer refugees was a good proposal in 1990, 59 % in 2020 (Demker 2021) and 53 % in 2025 (Svenska trender 1986–2025). The intervening years appear only as a curve in the report and are not stated here.

How do women and men differ?

Women report higher support for gender equality, LGBTQ and environmental protection (WVS/SOM all waves). Differences on immigration and EU are small. The gap widens in younger cohorts — especially since 2015.

Are opinion data comparable across countries?

With caution. WVS and EVS use the same wordings but translation and cultural interpretation differ. Country ranking is more robust than absolute percentages.

Why do different surveys give different results?

Question wording (‘fewer refugees’ vs ‘reduced immigration’), response options (five- vs ten-point scale), sampling method (phone vs web panel) and context (before/after a major event) can explain differences of 5–15 pp.

Does attitude change mean behaviour changes too?

Not automatically. Stated tolerance correlates weakly with actual behaviour (residence, socialising, hiring). The attitude-behaviour gap is well documented in social psychology.

Culture & values

Value shift

Values over time — what Swedes answered 1990 → 2025

World Values Survey (Sweden 1996, 2006, 2011): the share saying religion is very or rather important was 26–29 %, the share very or quite proud to be Swedish 82–85 %, and the share saying homosexuality is ‘always’ justifiable rose from 35 % to 59 %. SOM: 61 % thought receiving fewer refugees was a good proposal in 1990, 59 % in 2020 and 53 % in 2025.

How to read this

Data in context

How to read this

The charts below show what the numbers say — not an interpretation. Where data point in different directions (e.g. stable trust but rising insecurity) we show both series rather than pick a narrative.

Swedish values — WVS Sweden 1996, 2006, 2011

1996–2011 · percent of respondents · Sweden

Swedish rows in WVS Results by country (v20180912): religion very/rather important, very/quite proud, and homosexuality ‘always justifiable’ (10 of 10).

Swedish values — WVS Sweden 1996, 2006, 2011: Religion ‘important’ (%) moves from 29.2 (1996) to 26.2 (2011) — down 3 percentage points. Full values are available in the data table below (1996–2011, Sverige).

.chart-tablist{display:none!important} .chart-panel{display:none!important} .chart-table.sr-only{position:static!important;width:auto!important;height:auto!important;margin:0!important;overflow:auto!important;clip:auto!important;white-space:normal!important;border:1px solid hsl(var(--border));border-radius:0.375rem}

Swedish values — WVS Sweden 1996, 2006, 2011 · percent of respondents · 1996–2011 · Sweden
Year	Religion ‘important’ (%)	Proud of Sweden (%)	Homosexuality ‘always justifiable’ (%)
1,996	29.2	85.1	34.6
2,006	29.2	83.9	59.3
2,011	26.2	81.6	59.3

Observed published official statistics with no processing of our own

Method: WVS Wave 3 (1996), 5 (2006) and 6 (2011). 1990 and 2017–2020 are EVS surveys for Sweden and are not shown. Lines connect three data points.

Source: World Values Survey, Results by country, Wave 3, 5, 6 · SOM Institute, University of Gothenburg

Sources & method

Data source

Definitions

— WVS ‘religion viktig’ (V9, ‘Hur viktig är religion i ditt liv?’): andel ‘mycket’ plus ‘ganska viktig’ i WVS Results by country (v20180912), Sverigeraden: 1996 9,5 + 19,7 = 29,2 %; 2006 9,3 + 19,9 = 29,2 %; 2011 7,9 + 18,3 = 26,2 %.
— WVS ‘nationell stolthet’: andel ‘mycket’ plus ‘ganska stolt’: 1996 44,1 + 41,0 = 85,1 %; 2006 40,4 + 43,5 = 83,9 %; 2011 39,7 + 41,9 = 81,6 %.
— WVS ‘homosexualitet’ (skala 1 ‘aldrig’ – 10 ‘alltid’ rättfärdigat): andel som svarar 10 — 1996 34,6 %, 2006 59,3 %, 2011 59,3 %. Ett mått på rättfärdigande, inte en direkt fråga om acceptans.
— 1990 och 2017–2020 genomfördes i Sverige som EVS-undersökningar och finns inte i WVS:s publicerade resultattabeller; de visas därför inte.
— SOM ‘ta emot färre flyktingar’: andel som svarar ‘mycket’ eller ‘ganska bra förslag’ av dem som besvarat frågan. 1990 61 % och 2025 53 % enligt SOM Svenska trender 1986–2025 s. 58; 2020 59 % enligt Demker 2021. Övriga år är bara ritade som kurva i rapporten och anges inte här.
— Tillit visas inte som linje: SOM mäter frågan ’I vilken utsträckning går det att lita på människor i allmänhet?’ på en skala 0–10. Carlander (SOM 2023) beskriver tilliten som stabil 1996–2022 (medelvärde).

Uncertainties

— WVS för Sverige saknas i Wave 4 (endast EVS-data 1999).
— Tre WVS-mätpunkter på 15 år visar riktning, inte årlig utveckling; skillnader på 1–3 procentenheter ligger inom felmarginalen (n ≈ 1 000–1 200).
— Frågeformuleringar har varierat något mellan vågorna — jämförelse av riktning i tid är säkrare än absolut nivå.

Sources for this page

The data comes from official primary sources.

WVS · Irregular
World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017–2022), Joint EVS/WVS-dataset
Värderingsindex för Sverige (självuttryck och sekulär-rationella värden)
Latest data point 31 Dec 2020 · Source published 1 Jun 2024

Read the full investigation of how Sweden has changed.

Back to overview →

The question this page answers

How have Swedes' values changed over time according to recurring opinion and attitude surveys?

At a glance

Key figures — the most important numbers on this page

‘Religion is important’ 1996 → 2011

29 → 26 %

WVS Wave 3 → Wave 6. Share very/rather important.

Homosexuality ‘always justifiable’

35 → 59 %

WVS 1996 → 2011. Share answering 10 on the 1–10 scale.

Proud to be Swedish

85 → 82 %

WVS 1996 → 2011. Share very/quite proud.

Interpersonal trust 1996–2022

Stable

SOM, mean on a 0–10 scale (Carlander 2023).

‘Receive fewer refugees’ = good proposal

61 → 59 → 53 %

SOM 1990 · 2020 · 2025 (2020: Demker 2021).

Respondents/wave, WVS Sweden

> 1,000

Nationally representative sample, face-to-face or web panel. Confidence interval ±3 pp.

What does the data show?

Objective observations — not interpretations

Opinion data show how Swedes have answered in recurring surveys — not how they actually behave or what values they hold unconsciously. The gap between stated tolerance and actual behaviour (e.g. residential patterns) is well documented.
Swedish values consistently sit in the extreme corner of Inglehart's cultural map: high secular-rational dimension, high self-expression dimension. This position is stable across all seven WVS waves 1981–2022.
Between generations there are clear differences on gender equality, LGBTQ rights and environment. Within generations change is smaller — most values follow the cohort, not the life cycle.
Regional differences (urban/rural) are smaller than party differences but larger than gender and age differences on many questions. Education explains more variance than income.
A rising self-report (e.g. ‘religion is important’) can be driven by demographic change in the sample rather than individual attitude shift. Cross-sectional data cannot separate these mechanisms without panel studies.
Attitude change shows simultaneity — not cause. WVS data say nothing about why the answers move, only that they move.

Method note
The World Values Survey (WVS) and European Values Study (EVS) are conducted as nationally representative cross-sectional surveys every 5–9 years; the SOM Institute annually. All three use random samples of 1,000–3,400 persons per wave with a margin of error of about ±2–3 pp for national figures. Question wordings have varied slightly between waves — direction over time is safer to compare than absolute level. Wave 4 (1999–2004) is missing for Sweden in WVS; only EVS data exist. Separating cohort effects (‘you keep the values of your youth’) from period effects (‘everyone changes at once’) and ageing requires panel studies or pseudo-panels — single WVS waves cannot do it. We therefore present the trends as observations, not explanations.

Definitions

How the numbers are counted — and what they do not cover

Value: Deep-lying, relatively stable judgement of what is desirable (freedom, equality, order). Changes slowly, often over generations.Usually measured via batteries of items (Schwartz Value Survey, WVS Inglehart index).
Attitude: Contextual assessment of a specific object (immigration, EU, nuclear power). Moves faster than values and responds to events, media and political rhetoric.
Norm: Collective expectation of behaviour in a given situation. May deviate from both values (‘I dislike it’) and behaviour (‘but I do it anyway’).
Behaviour: Actual action — voting, residence, consumption. Often differs from stated attitudes; social desirability bias affects survey answers.
Social trust: Generalised trust in people in general. The SOM Institute measures it annually on a 0–10 scale; the mean has been stable 1996–2022 (Carlander 2023).Foreign studies (Uslaner et al.) distinguish generalised trust from particularised trust (in known persons).
Tolerance: Acceptance of opinions, behaviours or groups one personally dislikes. WVS measures via the ‘who would you not want as neighbour’ battery.
Individualism / collectivism: Cultural dimension (Hofstede, Triandis). Sweden is extremely individualist on Hofstede's scale yet simultaneously collectivist in institutional trust.
Secularisation: Reduced role of religion in society. In WVS for Sweden, 29 % in 1996 and 26 % in 2011 said religion is very or rather important.
Generation / cohort: Group born within the same period. Cohort effects are changes that stay with the group through life, distinct from life-cycle or period effects.
Opinion survey: Questionnaire to a random sample to estimate the population distribution. Quality depends on sampling frame, response rate and question wording.
Panel study: Same individuals interviewed several times. Can separate individual change from sampling effects — but suffers from attrition and panel fatigue.
Cross-sectional study: New sample at each measurement. Captures the population distribution but cannot separate individual from compositional change.
Sample: Randomly selected individuals from the population. Probability sampling is required for margin of error to be meaningful; web panels are probability samples only if recruitment is.
Confidence interval: Statistical interval that with a given probability (usually 95 %) covers the true population value. ±3 pp for national figures at n ≈ 1,000.

Primary sources

Agencies and research institutions behind this page

agencies/institutions

reports & studies

primary datasets

Frequently asked questions

Short answers to what is most often discussed

Yes. Sweden sits consistently in the extreme corner of Inglehart's cultural map (high secular-rational, high self-expression) — closest to Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. This has been stable across all WVS waves since 1981.

Logical next steps if you want to understand the background

Values over time — what Swedes answered 1990 → 2025

How to read this

Immigration opinion — SOM Institute

Human consequence

Sources for this page

At a glance

What does the data show?

Definitions

Primary sources

Frequently asked questions

Related topics

Media vs reality

Social trust