Inhaltsanalyse von 1018 Wahlprogrammen in 20 Ländern.
Themen: Von den Inhaltsanalytikern wurden 56 Themenkategorien, die zu sieben politischen Bereichen zusammengefaßt werden können, gebildet. Auf der Basis der Anzahl der Sätze bzw. Halbsätze zu den einzelnen Kategorien wurden Prozentanteile ermittelt und als Daten dieses Datensatzes erfaßt.
1.) Ausländische Beziehungen: Besondere Beziehungen zu anderen Ländern; Anti-Imperialismus; Einstellung zum Militär; Frieden; Internationalismus; Europäische Gemeinschaft.
2.) Frieden und Demokratie: Frieden und Menschenrechte; Demokratie; Position zur Verfassung des Landes.
3.) Politisches System: Zentralismus; Dezentralismus; Effektivität der Regierung und der Verwaltung; politische Korruption; politische Autorität.
4.) Wirtschaft: Freies Unternehmertum; Anreizsystem; Marktregulierung; Planwirtschaft; Zusammenarbeit; Protektionismus; ökonomische Ziele; nachfrageorientierte Wirtschaftspolitik; Produktivität; Technologie und Infrastruktur; Kontrollfunktion der Regierung; Verstaatlichung; Marxismus; Antiwachstumspolitik.
5.) Wohlfahrt und Lebensqualität: Umweltschutz; Kultur; soziale Gerechtigkeit; Expansion oder Begrenzung des Wohlfahrtsstaats; Begrenzung oder Expansion der Bildungsversorgung.
6.) Patriotismus bzw. Nationalismus; Betonung traditioneller Werte; Law and Order; sozialer Ausgleich und Harmonie; Multikulturismus.
7.) Soziale Gruppen: Besondere Ausrichtung auf Arbeiter, Landwirte oder Mittelklasse sowie Gruppen der oberen Klasse; Bezugnahme auf unterprivilegierte Minoritäten; Ansprache von nicht ökonomischen demographischen Gruppen wie Frauen, alte Menschen oder junge Leute.
The project analyzes how societies' vulnerabilities to different types of policy responses to the crisis affects their willingness to engage in policies that constribute to a sustainable solution of the euro crisis. The argument builds on the insight that the euro crisis is, at its root, a balance-of-payments crisis and argues that the resulting distributive struggles surrounding the politics of the euro crisis in surplus and deficit countries are distinct but related, and should therefore be analyzed in a unified framework. The vulnerability to internal reforms is inversely related to the willingness to support (in surplus countries) or demand (in deficit countries) transfer payments to crisis countries.
Empirically, the project examined how vulnerability profiles affect domestic crisis politics and policies on two levels of analysis, the interest-group and the national level. It used a mixed-methods research design that combined a quantitative analysis of national vulnerability profiles and crisis politics in a wider set of deficit and surplus countries, interest-group surveys in selected Eurozone surplus and deficit countries and qualitative comparative case studies of the domestic politics of the euro crisis in these countries.
The overarching goal of the project was to generate an encompassing picture of the distributional politics of the euro crisis and a better understanding of the constraints under which European policymakers operate in their attempts to solve the crisis.
The project analyzes how societies' vulnerabilities to different types of policy responses to the crisis affects their willingness to engage in policies that constribute to a sustainable solution of the euro crisis. The argument builds on the insight that the euro crisis is, at its root, a balance-of-payments crisis and argues that the resulting distributive struggles surrounding the politics of the euro crisis in surplus and deficit countries are distinct but related, and should therefore be analyzed in a unified framework. The vulnerability to internal reforms is inversely related to the willingness to support (in surplus countries) or demand (in deficit countries) transfer payments to crisis countries.
Empirically, the project examined how vulnerability profiles affect domestic crisis politics and policies on two levels of analysis, the interest-group and the national level. It used a mixed-methods research design that combined a quantitative analysis of national vulnerability profiles and crisis politics in a wider set of deficit and surplus countries, interest-group surveys in selected Eurozone surplus and deficit countries and qualitative comparative case studies of the domestic politics of the euro crisis in these countries.
The overarching goal of the project was to generate an encompassing picture of the distributional politics of the euro crisis and a better understanding of the constraints under which European policymakers operate in their attempts to solve the crisis.
Objectives: This project aims to advance knowledge in labour politics by focusing on the 'contentious politics of unemployment', i.e. the relationship between political institutional approaches to employment policy and political conflicts mobilized by collective actors over unemployment in the public domain. It is designed to study this topic at national, international comparative, and transnational levels. Key objectives: (a) to generate new data for longitudinal and comparative analyses of ideological and policy positions of actors and their relationships; (b) to study the potential for political participation 'from below' by citizens campaigning for the rights of the unemployed and the conditions under which existing organizational networks and policy dialogues transform in a more open civil policy deliberation; (c) to provide knowledge based on rigorous cross-national and EU-level transnational analyses allowing grounded empirical statements about the Europeanisation of the field. Description: As the contested and negotiated character of the employment policy field expresses itself both in the public domain and in the institutional arenas for interest mediation, we look both at political claim-making in the public space and policy deliberation within the polity. The overall design of the research has three main components: (a) mapping the field of political contention, i.e. structures of ideological cleavages and actor relationships, both longitudinally and cross-nationally; (b) examining the nature of the multi-organizational field extending from the core policy domain to the public domain, i.e. networks and channels of political influence between core policy actors and intermediary organizations, on one side, and civil society organizations and social movements representing the unemployed (including the unemployed themselves), on the other; (c) studying the nature of the interaction between EU-level and national policy-making by determining the channels of political influence that exist between European institutions and national policy domains in the field (the multi-level governance of employment policy), and examining to what extent there are new political opportunities for the bottom-up empowerment of citizens' organizations as a consequence of the emergence of the EU as an actor in the field. A new body of data will be generated which will allow for longitudinal (1990-2002) and comparative (F, D, I, S, CH, UK) analyses of ideological and policy positions of actors and their relationships in the unemployment issue-field. This will be backed up by interviews conducted with key actors in the organizational field (policy actors, employers associations, trade unions, parties, NGOs and social movements) both at the national and transnational levels. Innovative attempts will be made to establish networks and links between the involved actors as part of our dissemination strategy, which is key to the overall success of the project. Expected results: The success of this project is underwritten by the European dimension. It will provide the first systematic cross-national comparison of the contentious politics of unemployment based on original data. It has a high potential for being a path-breaking academic study in labour politics, social movements and Europe. The findings will feedback understanding to the actors in the field, facilitated through our dissemination strategy which aims to contribute toward a constructive social dialogue.
Objectives: This project aims to advance knowledge in labour politics by focusing on the 'contentious politics of unemployment', i.e. the relationship between political institutional approaches to employment policy and political conflicts mobilized by collective actors over unemployment in the public domain. It is designed to study this topic at national, international comparative, and transnational levels. Key objectives: (a) to generate new data for longitudinal and comparative analyses of ideological and policy positions of actors and their relationships; (b) to study the potential for political participation 'from below' by citizens campaigning for the rights of the unemployed and the conditions under which existing organizational networks and policy dialogues transform in a more open civil policy deliberation; (c) to provide knowledge based on rigorous cross-national and EU-level transnational analyses allowing grounded empirical statements about the Europeanisation of the field. Description: As the contested and negotiated character of the employment policy field expresses itself both in the public domain and in the institutional arenas for interest mediation, we look both at political claim-making in the public space and policy deliberation within the polity. The overall design of the research has three main components: (a) mapping the field of political contention, i.e. structures of ideological cleavages and actor relationships, both longitudinally and cross-nationally; (b) examining the nature of the multi-organizational field extending from the core policy domain to the public domain, i.e. networks and channels of political influence between core policy actors and intermediary organizations, on one side, and civil society organizations and social movements representing the unemployed (including the unemployed themselves), on the other; (c) studying the nature of the interaction between EU-level and national policy-making by determining the channels of political influence that exist between European institutions and national policy domains in the field (the multi-level governance of employment policy), and examining to what extent there are new political opportunities for the bottom-up empowerment of citizens' organizations as a consequence of the emergence of the EU as an actor in the field. A new body of data will be generated which will allow for longitudinal (1990-2002) and comparative (F, D, I, S, CH, UK) analyses of ideological and policy positions of actors and their relationships in the unemployment issue-field. This will be backed up by interviews conducted with key actors in the organizational field (policy actors, employers associations, trade unions, parties, NGOs and social movements) both at the national and transnational levels. Innovative attempts will be made to establish networks and links between the involved actors as part of our dissemination strategy, which is key to the overall success of the project. Expected results: The success of this project is underwritten by the European dimension. It will provide the first systematic cross-national comparison of the contentious politics of unemployment based on original data. It has a high potential for being a path-breaking academic study in labour politics, social movements and Europe. The findings will feedback understanding to the actors in the field, facilitated through our dissemination strategy which aims to contribute toward a constructive social dialogue.
Since 1999, the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) has supported Switzerland's participation in international surveys. SIDOS is responsible for their implementation. In autumn 1999 the first survey "Eurobarometer in Switzerland" was launched. This survey includes questions from the Eurobarometer survey of the European Commission, a specific Swiss socio-political part and a socio-demographic part. Since 2000, the questions from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) were added. This survey was subsequently conducted annually until and including 2003. Since 2005, the survey will only be conducted every other year and will be given a new name, MOSAiCH (Measurement and Observation of Social Attitudes in Switzerland). The composition of the survey remains largely unchanged and includes a recurrent socio-political part, a thematic section that changes every time, two ISSP modules and a detailed socio-demographic section. It remains an important objective of this project to provide the Swiss researchers with a dataset that enables both spatially and temporally comparative analyses.
Since 1999, the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) has supported Switzerland's participation in international surveys. SIDOS is responsible for their implementation. In autumn 1999 the first survey "Eurobarometer in Switzerland" was launched. This survey includes questions from the Eurobarometer survey of the European Commission, a specific Swiss socio-political part and a socio-demographic part. Since 2000, the questions from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) were added. This survey was subsequently conducted annually until and including 2003. Since 2005, the survey will only be conducted every other year and will be given a new name, MOSAiCH (Measurement and Observation of Social Attitudes in Switzerland). The composition of the survey remains largely unchanged and includes a recurrent socio-political part, a thematic section that changes every time, two ISSP modules and a detailed socio-demographic section. It remains an important objective of this project to provide the Swiss researchers with a dataset that enables both spatially and temporally comparative analyses.
The survey consists of two parts: 1. Post-election survey within the international comparative study which has been working for several decades under the title Comparative Studies of Electoral Systems (CSES, www.cses.org). In 2016, it was the implementation of Module 4 focused - in addition to standard electoral questions - on issues of redistribution. 2) survey within the frame of the International Social Research Program (ISSP, www.issp.org http://www.issp.org), namely module Role of the Government, implemented in Slovakia for the second time, the first one was in 2008. Both parts have joint socio-demographic identification variables. Post-election survey is focused on broad variety of factors related to electoral decision - the perception of political parties and their leaders, the satisfaction with democracy, evaluation of economic development, and aspects of election campaign. The Role of Government survey is focused on attitudes to government's competences, in general and specifically in relation to other actors - NGOs, private sector, church organizations and alike. Several questions deal with the public views on corruption, responsiveness, tax policies, interest in politics and other. The survey also includes several questions that in the form of "split ballot" experimentally verify the validity of questions frequently used in the surveys, as well as scales and responses´ alternatives. These so-called "methodological experiments" are included in all data collections conducted within the APVV-14-0527 project, their results will be elaborated in a separate study.
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), headquartered in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam, was founded in 1959 and has since carried out a number of internationally comparative educational research projects. At the 1994 General Assembly, it was decided to launch a study in the field of political education at school. The IEA had already tackled this topic earlier. However, the end of the Cold War and the resulting democratization processes in different countries made it seem appropriate and desirable to update knowledge about the problems, methods, possibilities and limitations of civic education. The Department of Education of the University of Freiburg was in charge of the participation of Switzerland. A first publication with the results from the first phase of the project appeared in 1999, in the form of a volume based on case studies describing the situation of civic education in 24 countries, i.e. the majority of the 28 participating countries. The results of these case studies were used to prepare Phase 2, which was empirically oriented. Specifically, it focused on a test to assess the civic knowledge of fourteen-year-olds and a survey of their attitudes and behavior. The sample size was around 3,000 per country (3104 in Switzerland). In total, about 90,000 young people took part in the study in this way, as well as their teachers, who were asked about their goals, methods, difficulties, priorities, etc. The publication with the results of the empirical part provides extensive information about what the young people at the end of the 90s know about the democratic processes and institutions and what they think about it. The results tend to suggest that civic education is more or less the same everywhere. Should we therefore highlight the multiplicity of situations? Certain things seem to be constant across large geographic regions. For example, civic education is too often limited to imparting knowledge from the top down, while the encouragement of critical thinking and political commitment is neglected. At least the teachers seem to thnik this way and also claim to regret this fact. Another common deficit is found in the treatment of economic issues, which leads to political issues being often treat in a abstract context.
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), headquartered in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam, was founded in 1959 and has since carried out a number of internationally comparative educational research projects. At the 1994 General Assembly, it was decided to launch a study in the field of political education at school. The IEA had already tackled this topic earlier. However, the end of the Cold War and the resulting democratization processes in different countries made it seem appropriate and desirable to update knowledge about the problems, methods, possibilities and limitations of civic education. The Department of Education of the University of Freiburg was in charge of the participation of Switzerland. A first publication with the results from the first phase of the project appeared in 1999, in the form of a volume based on case studies describing the situation of civic education in 24 countries, i.e. the majority of the 28 participating countries. The results of these case studies were used to prepare Phase 2, which was empirically oriented. Specifically, it focused on a test to assess the civic knowledge of fourteen-year-olds and a survey of their attitudes and behavior. The sample size was around 3,000 per country (3104 in Switzerland). In total, about 90,000 young people took part in the study in this way, as well as their teachers, who were asked about their goals, methods, difficulties, priorities, etc. The publication with the results of the empirical part provides extensive information about what the young people at the end of the 90s know about the democratic processes and institutions and what they think about it. The results tend to suggest that civic education is more or less the same everywhere. Should we therefore highlight the multiplicity of situations? Certain things seem to be constant across large geographic regions. For example, civic education is too often limited to imparting knowledge from the top down, while the encouragement of critical thinking and political commitment is neglected. At least the teachers seem to thnik this way and also claim to regret this fact. Another common deficit is found in the treatment of economic issues, which leads to political issues being often treat in a abstract context.
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), headquartered in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam, was founded in 1959 and has since carried out a number of internationally comparative educational research projects. At the 1994 General Assembly, it was decided to launch a study in the field of political education at school. The IEA had already tackled this topic earlier. However, the end of the Cold War and the resulting democratization processes in different countries made it seem appropriate and desirable to update knowledge about the problems, methods, possibilities and limitations of civic education. The Department of Education of the University of Freiburg was in charge of the participation of Switzerland. A first publication with the results from the first phase of the project appeared in 1999, in the form of a volume based on case studies describing the situation of civic education in 24 countries, i.e. the majority of the 28 participating countries. The results of these case studies were used to prepare Phase 2, which was empirically oriented. Specifically, it focused on a test to assess the civic knowledge of fourteen-year-olds and a survey of their attitudes and behavior. The sample size was around 3,000 per country (3104 in Switzerland). In total, about 90,000 young people took part in the study in this way, as well as their teachers, who were asked about their goals, methods, difficulties, priorities, etc. The publication with the results of the empirical part provides extensive information about what the young people at the end of the 90s know about the democratic processes and institutions and what they think about it. The results tend to suggest that civic education is more or less the same everywhere. Should we therefore highlight the multiplicity of situations? Certain things seem to be constant across large geographic regions. For example, civic education is too often limited to imparting knowledge from the top down, while the encouragement of critical thinking and political commitment is neglected. At least the teachers seem to thnik this way and also claim to regret this fact. Another common deficit is found in the treatment of economic issues, which leads to political issues being often treat in a abstract context.
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), headquartered in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam, was founded in 1959 and has since carried out a number of internationally comparative educational research projects. At the 1994 General Assembly, it was decided to launch a study in the field of political education at school. The IEA had already tackled this topic earlier. However, the end of the Cold War and the resulting democratization processes in different countries made it seem appropriate and desirable to update knowledge about the problems, methods, possibilities and limitations of civic education. The Department of Education of the University of Freiburg was in charge of the participation of Switzerland. A first publication with the results from the first phase of the project appeared in 1999, in the form of a volume based on case studies describing the situation of civic education in 24 countries, i.e. the majority of the 28 participating countries. The results of these case studies were used to prepare Phase 2, which was empirically oriented. Specifically, it focused on a test to assess the civic knowledge of fourteen-year-olds and a survey of their attitudes and behavior. The sample size was around 3,000 per country (3104 in Switzerland). In total, about 90,000 young people took part in the study in this way, as well as their teachers, who were asked about their goals, methods, difficulties, priorities, etc. The publication with the results of the empirical part provides extensive information about what the young people at the end of the 90s know about the democratic processes and institutions and what they think about it. The results tend to suggest that civic education is more or less the same everywhere. Should we therefore highlight the multiplicity of situations? Certain things seem to be constant across large geographic regions. For example, civic education is too often limited to imparting knowledge from the top down, while the encouragement of critical thinking and political commitment is neglected. At least the teachers seem to thnik this way and also claim to regret this fact. Another common deficit is found in the treatment of economic issues, which leads to political issues being often treat in a abstract context.
The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), headquartered in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam, was founded in 1959 and has since carried out a number of internationally comparative educational research projects. At the 1994 General Assembly, it was decided to launch a study in the field of political education at school. The IEA had already tackled this topic earlier. However, the end of the Cold War and the resulting democratization processes in different countries made it seem appropriate and desirable to update knowledge about the problems, methods, possibilities and limitations of civic education. The Department of Education of the University of Freiburg was in charge of the participation of Switzerland. A first publication with the results from the first phase of the project appeared in 1999, in the form of a volume based on case studies describing the situation of civic education in 24 countries, i.e. the majority of the 28 participating countries. The results of these case studies were used to prepare Phase 2, which was empirically oriented. Specifically, it focused on a test to assess the civic knowledge of fourteen-year-olds and a survey of their attitudes and behavior. The sample size was around 3,000 per country (3104 in Switzerland). In total, about 90,000 young people took part in the study in this way, as well as their teachers, who were asked about their goals, methods, difficulties, priorities, etc. The publication with the results of the empirical part provides extensive information about what the young people at the end of the 90s know about the democratic processes and institutions and what they think about it. The results tend to suggest that civic education is more or less the same everywhere. Should we therefore highlight the multiplicity of situations? Certain things seem to be constant across large geographic regions. For example, civic education is too often limited to imparting knowledge from the top down, while the encouragement of critical thinking and political commitment is neglected. At least the teachers seem to thnik this way and also claim to regret this fact. Another common deficit is found in the treatment of economic issues, which leads to political issues being often treat in a abstract context.
The structure and origins of attitudes to genetic engineering have so far hardly been systematically investigated in Switzerland. In Switzerland, too, the future of genetic engineering procedures appears to depend on consensus among the population. The vote on the gene protection initiative and the media campaigns that preceded it made it clear that there can be no talk of consensus. Rather, there are deep, almost unbridgeable gulfs between proponents and opponents of this new technology. At the scientific level, the opinion polls carried out so far and the rare qualitative studies on the attitudes on this issue are far from sufficient to understand the motives of the advocates and opponents of genetic engineering and to understand the dynamics of opinion-forming both among politicians and among the population in this area. In addition, longitudinal studies on both the policy process and media coverage of genetic engineering are lacking. For this reason, the IPMZ - Institute for Journalism and Media Research at the University of Zurich initiated a research project in 1996 which, supported by a group of researchers from different disciplines and institutions, tried to shed light on the phenomenon of "genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" from different perspectives and on the basis of four interlinked subprojects. Hypotheses, theoretical perspectives and methodical access should be mutually coordinated. In detail, the subprojects (1) are a policy analysis of genetic engineering policy in Switzerland, (2) a content analysis of media coverage of genetic engineering over the last 25 years, (3) supplemented by a qualitative content analysis of the media response to the "Dolly" case and (4) a representative survey of the Swiss population on genetic engineering in spring 1997 (Eurobarometer 1997). Only the data of the representative survey is archived at FORS. The Swiss project "Genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" is not only transdisciplinary in concept, but also international and comparative, as it is part of the concerted action "Biotechnology and the European Public", in which researchers from 15 countries work on the topic under the direction of a team of researchers from the "Science Museum" and the "London School of Economics". The common basis is the Eurobarometer Survey conducted in these countries as well as the jointly conceived and coordinated policy studies on the regulation of genetic engineering and content analyses of media reporting in the various European countries, but also in the USA and Canada. The goal of the international project can be summarized as follows: "A cross-national comparative analysis will identify why, in different countries and at different times, particular issues and concerns have characterized public debate and public policy making. This will lead to a European comparative perspective on the evaluation and interpretation of the Eurobarometer survey. The practical implications of public perceptions for European biotechnology policy-making will be drawn out for the benefit of the scientific, industrial and policy-making communities."
Named MOSAiCH since 2005, this project carries out the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) and Eurobarometer surveys in Switzerland every second year. The survey is designed to allow comparative analyses both geographically and over time. The composition of the questions remains largely unchanged and includes a recurrent socio-political part, two ISSP modules, a wave-specific topic initiated by the Swiss researchers and a detailed socio-demographic part. See also description under study "MOSAiCH 2011" and on the following website http://www2.unil.ch/fors/spip.php?rubrique136&lang=en.
The specific modules of the 2011 edition include: - ISSP 2010: Environment III - ISSP 2011: Health I (especially health policy) - Additional international questions ISSP 2010 and 2011 - Additional Swiss questions on the environment (partly from the Swiss Environmental Survey 2007 carried out by ETH Zurich) - Trust in institutions, Swiss politics and attitude towards Europe - Socio-demographic questions - Additional questions: survey climate, telephony
