The project explores the extent to which transnational private governance affects the capacity of workers to take collective action in pursuit of improvements in employment conditions in developing countries.
Transnational private labour regulation such as corporate codes of conduct and multi-stakeholder standards on labour, environment or human rights claim to respond to the governance deficits that have arisen as a result of the globalization of global production networks. Yet, little consensus exists about the effectiveness of their monitoring and enforcement practices or their ultimate impact.
Context
Since the 1990s, the concern has intensified about the responsibility of businesses in global subcontracting chains for exploitation of labour, inequality, and pollution. Many private transnational regulatory initiatives claim to address this concern by incentivizing multinational companies to voluntary sign up to human rights and environmental standards often referring to, for example, the International Labour Organization's core labour standards. The effectiveness of this approach remains a complex and highly debated issue.
Over the last decade, scholars have studied the emergence, performance and problems related to transnational private labour regulation, their interactions on the transnational level and local level compliance. Stepping back from conventional debates on the overall effectiveness of transnational private governance, the project focuses instead on agency: the effect of transnational private labour regulation on the capacity of those involved, especially workers, to act in local contexts. With our project, we explore how different types of transnational private labour regulation, different national settings and different firm-level contexts of application combine to form what we call transnational hybrid production regimes.
Aim
The study examines how these regimes support workers' collective capacity to take action to improve their own conditions of employment.
The "Religious Fundamentalism and Radicalization Survey (RFRS)" is a large-scale cross-sectional survey conducted among Muslims, Christians, Jews, and non-believers in Cyprus, Germany, Israel, Kenya, Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Turkey, and the USA. The survey is designed specifically to test hypotheses related to determinants of religious radicalization. It includes a broad range of variables concerning religiosity, religious knowledge, and fundamentalism, as well as a survey experiment concerning the effect of religious scripture on religious violence legitimation. The data collection in Cyprus, Germany, Israel, Kenya, Lebanon, Palestine, and Turkey was funded by the WZB Berlin Social Science Center, whereas the data collection in the USA was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (#435-2012-0922). The fieldwork for the survey took place between November 2016 and June 2017.
The data set currently only includes the variables used in the following publication: Koopmans, Ruud; Kanol, Eylem; Stolle, Dietlind (2020): Scriptural legitimation and the mobilization of support for religious violence: Experimental evidence across three religions and seven countries. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. Latest articles. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1822158 Analyses of other parts of the data set are ongoing. Once these are completed, the entire data set will be made publicly available.
Themen: Einschätzung des persönlichen Glücksgefühls; Einstellung zu vorehelichem Geschlechtsverkehr und zu außerehelichem Geschlechtsverkehr (Ehebruch); Einstellung zu homosexuellen Beziehungen zwischen Erwachsenen; Einstellung zu Abtreibung im Falle von Behinderung oder Krankheit des Babys und im Falle geringen Einkommens der Familie; Rollenverständnis in der Ehe; Vertrauen in Institutionen (Parlament, Unternehmen und Industrie, Kirche und religiöse Organisationen, Gerichte und Rechtssystem, Schulen und Bildungssystem); eigene Mobilität; Einstellung zum Einfluss von religiösen Führern auf Wähler und Regierung; Einstellung zu Wissenschaft und Religion (Skala: moderne Wissenschaft bringt mehr Schaden als Nutzen, zu viel Vertrauen in die Wissenschaft und zu wenig religiöses Vertrauen, Religionen bringen mehr Konflikte als Frieden, Intoleranz von Menschen mit starken religiösen Überzeugungen); Beurteilung der Macht von Kirchen und religiösen Organisationen im Lande; Einstellung zur Gleichberechtigung aller religiösen Gruppen im Land und Respekt für alle Religionen; Akzeptanz einer Person anderen Glaubens oder mit unterschiedlichen religiösen Ansichten als Ehepartner im Verwandtschaftskreis sowie als Kandidat der präferierten Partei (soziale Distanz); Einstellung zur öffentlichen Redefreiheit bzw. zum Publikationsrecht für religiöse Extremisten; Zweifel oder fester Glaube an Gott (Skala Deismus); Glaube an: ein Leben nach dem Tod, Himmel, Hölle, Wunder, Reinkarnation, Nirwana, übernatürliche Kräfte verstorbener Vorfahren; Einstellung zu einer höheren Wahrheit und zum Sinn des Lebens (Gott kümmert sich um jeden Menschen persönlich, nur wenig persönlicher Einfluss auf das Leben möglich (Fatalismus), Leben hat nur einen Sinn aufgrund der Existenz Gottes, Leben dient keinem Zweck, eigenes Tun verleiht dem Leben Sinn, persönliche Verbindung mit Gott ohne Kirche oder Gottesdienste); Religion der Mutter, des Vaters und des Ehepartners bzw. Partners; zusätzlich länderspezifisch für Kenia: Religion der Mutter, des Vaters und des Ehepartners bzw. Partners; Religion, mit der der Befragte aufgewachsen ist; zusätzlich länderspezifisch für Kenia: Religion, mit der der Befragte aufgewachsen ist; Kirchgangshäufigkeit des Vaters und der Mutter; persönliche Kirchgangshäufigkeit in der Jugend; Häufigkeit des Betens und der Teilnahme an religiösen Aktivitäten; Schrein, Altar oder religiöses Objekt (z.B. Kreuz) im Haushalt des Befragten; Häufigkeit des Besuchs eines heiligen Ortes (Schrein, Tempel, Kirche oder Moschee) aus religiösen Gründen; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität und Spiritualität; Wahrheit in einer oder in allen Religionen; Vorteilhaftigkeit der Ausübung einer Religion (Skala: inneren Frieden und Glück finden, Freundschaften schließen, Unterstützung in schwierigen Zeiten, Gleichgesinnte treffen).
Optionale Items: Bekehrung zum Glauben nach einem Schlüsselerlebnis; persönliche Opfer als Ausdruck des Glaubens wie Fasten oder Einhalten einer speziellen Diät während heiliger Zeiten wie z.B. Ramadan.
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter; Familienstand; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; Jahre der Schulbildung, höchster Bildungsabschluss; länderspezifischer Bildungsgrad; derzeitiger Beschäftigungsstatus des Befragten und seines Partners; Wochenarbeitszeit; Beruf (ISCO-88) des Befragten und seines Partners; Vorgesetztenfunktion; Beschäftigung im privaten oder öffentlichen Dienst oder Selbständigkeit des Befragten und seines Partners; Selbständige wurden gefragt: Anzahl der Beschäftigten; Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft; Einkommensquellen des Befragten (länderspezifisch), Haushaltseinkommen (länderspezifisch); Haushaltsgröße; Haushaltszusammensetzung; Parteipräferenz (links-rechts), länderspezifische Parteipräferenz; Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten Wahl; Konfession; Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Selbsteinstufung auf einer Oben-Unten-Skala; Region und Ortsgröße (länderspezifisch), Urbanisierungsgrad; Geburtsland und ethnische Herkunft; zusätzlich länderspezifisch für Kenia und Tansania: ethnische Herkunft.
Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Datenerhebungsart; case substitution; Gewichtungsfaktoren.
The "Religious Fundamentalism and Radicalization Survey (RFRS)" is a large-scale cross-sectional survey conducted among Muslims, Christians, Jews, and non-believers in Cyprus, Germany, Israel, Kenya, Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Turkey, and the USA. The survey is designed specifically to test hypotheses related to determinants of religious radicalization. It includes a broad range of variables concerning religiosity, religious knowledge, and fundamentalism, as well as a survey experiment concerning the effect of religious scripture on religious violence legitimation. The data collection in Cyprus, Germany, Israel, Kenya, Lebanon, Palestine, and Turkey was funded by the WZB Berlin Social Science Center, whereas the data collection in the USA was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (#435-2012-0922). The fieldwork for the survey took place between November 2016 and June 2017.
The data set currently only includes the variables used in the following publications:
Kanol, Eylem (2021): Explaining Unfavorable Attitudes Toward Religious Out-Groups Among Three Major Religions. In: Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Early view articles. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jssr.12725
Koopmans, Ruud; Kanol, Eylem; Stolle, Dietlind (2021): Scriptural legitimation and the mobilisation of support for religious violence: Experimental evidence across three religions and seven countries. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 47 (7), pp. 1498-1516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1822158
Analyses of other parts of the data set are ongoing. Once these are completed, the entire data set will be made publicly available.
Themen: Einschätzung des persönlichen Glücksgefühls; Zufriedenheit mit den Beziehungen zu Familienmitgliedern; Einstellung zu außerehelichem Geschlechtsverkehr; Einstellung zu homosexuellen Beziehungen zwischen Erwachsenen; Einstellung zur Abtreibung bei geringem Familieneinkommen; Geschlechterrollenverständnis in der Ehe; Institutionenvertrauen (Parlament, Unternehmen und Industrie, Kirche und religiöse Organisationen, Gerichte und Rechtssystem, Schulen und Bildungssystem); Einstellung zum Einfluss religiöser Führer auf Wähler; Einstellung zu Wissenschaft und Religion (zu viel Vertrauen in die Wissenschaft und zu wenig religiöser Glaube, mehr Konflikte durch Religionen als Frieden, Intoleranz von Menschen mit starken religiösen Überzeugungen); Beurteilung der Macht von Kirchen und religiösen Organisationen im Land; Akzeptanz einer Person anderen Glaubens oder mit sehr unterschiedlicher religiösen Ansichten als Ehepartner eines Verwandten (soziale Distanz); Einstellung zur Meinungsfreiheit für religiöse Extremisten bei öffentlichen Versammlungen, im Internet und in sozialen Medien; Zweifel oder fester Glaube an Gott (Skala Deismus); früherer oder derzeitiger Gottesglaube; Glaube an ein Leben nach dem Tod, Himmel, Hölle, religiöse Wunder und übernatürliche Kräfte verstorbener Vorfahren; Einstellung zu einer höheren Wahrheit und zum Sinn des Lebens (Gott kümmert sich um jeden Menschen persönlich, nur wenig persönlicher Einfluss auf das Leben möglich (Fatalismus), Leben hat nur einen Sinn aufgrund der Existenz Gottes, Leben dient keinem Zweck, eigenes Tun verleiht dem Leben Sinn, persönliche Verbindung mit Gott ohne Kirche oder Gottesdienste); Meinung zur Geschlechtergleichstellung in der eigenen Religion; Religion von Mutter und Vater in der Kindheit des Befragten; Religion, mit der der Befragte aufgewachsen ist; Kirchgangshäufigkeit des Vaters und der Mutter in der Kindheit des Befragten; persönliche Kirchgangshäufigkeit im Alter von 11 bis 12 Jahren; Häufigkeit von Gebeten; Häufigkeit der Teilnahme an kirchlichen Aktivitäten (abgesehen vom Besuch von Gottesdiensten); in den letzten 12 Monaten außerhalb des Gottesdienstes religiöse Schriften gelesen oder gehört (z.B. Bibel, Koran, Thora oder andere religiöse Schriften); Schrein, Altar oder religiöses Objekt (z.B. Kreuz) im Haushalt des Befragten; Häufigkeit des Besuchs eines heiligen Ortes (Schrein, Tempel, Kirche oder Moschee) aus religiösen Gründen; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität und Spiritualität; Vorteilhaftigkeit der Ausübung einer Religion um Freundschaften zu schließen und als Unterstützung in schwierigen Zeiten; Religionen als Hindernis für die Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern; Meinung zur Trennung von Staat und Religion; Meinung zur friedlichen Koexistenz von Menschen unterschiedlicher Religionen; Religion steht für die Vergangenheit und nicht für die Zukunft; Religion ist für das Leben heute genauso relevant wie in der Vergangenheit; Einstellung gegenüber verschiedenen religiösen Gruppen (Christen, Muslime, Hindus, Buddhisten, Juden, Atheisten oder Nicht-Gläubige); Selbsteinschätzung des Gesundheitszustands.
Optionale Items (nicht in allen Ländern durchgeführt): wiedergeborene Christen; Einstellung zur Bibel; Bekehrung zum Glauben nach einem Schlüsselerlebnis; Glaube an Glücksbringer, Wahrsager, Gesundbeter und Horoskope; Entscheidungskriterien für persönliches Handeln (Gesetze oder religiöse Prinzipien); wahrgenommene Bedrohung durch Angehörige verschiedener Gruppen (Christen, Muslime, Hindus, Buddhisten, Juden, Nicht-Gläubige); Personenvertrauen vs. Vorsicht im Umgang mit Menschen; die Gesetze eines Landes sollten nicht auf einer Religion basieren; Glaube an Reinkarnation und Nirvana.
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsjahr); Jahre der Schulbildung; Bildung (länderspezifisch); höchster Bildungsabschluss (abgeleitet vom länderspezifischen Bildungsgrad); derzeitiger oder früherer Erwerbsstatus; Wochenarbeitszeit; Arbeitsverhältnis; Vorgesetztenfunktion; Anzahl der Mitarbeiter, für die Weisungsbefugnis besteht; Art des Unternehmens: Gewinn vs. Gemeinnützigkeit bzw. öffentlich vs. privat; Beruf (ISCO/ ILO 2008); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft; Religionszugehörigkeit oder Konfession (länderspezifisch); Konfessionsgruppen (abgeleitet von der länderspezifischen Religion); Kirchgangshäufigkeit; subjektive Schichteinstufung (Selbsteinstufung auf einer Oben-Unten-Skala); Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten allgemeinen Wahl und gewählte länderspezifische Partei; Einstufung der gewählten Partei auf einem Links-Rechts-Schema; ethnische Gruppenzugehörigkeit (länderspezifisch); Haushaltsgröße; Haushaltszusammensetzung: Anzahl der Erwachsenen im Haushalt; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt, die das Schuleintrittsalter überschritten haben; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt, die das Schulalter noch nicht erreicht haben; persönliches Einkommen des Befragten (länderspezifisch); Haushaltseinkommen (länderspezifisch); Familienstand; Geburtsland von Vater und Mutter (Migrationshintergrund); Urbanisierungsgrad des Wohnortes; Region (länderspezifisch).
Informationen über den Ehegatten/ Partner zu folgenden Themen: derzeitiger oder früherer Erwerbsstatus, Wochenarbeitszeit, Arbeitsverhältnis, Vorgesetztenfunktion, Beruf (ISCO/ ILO 2008); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus.
Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: für einige Länder wörtliche Berufsnennungen (Befragter und Ehegatte/ Partner); Befragten-ID; Kennzeichnungsvariable für die Ersetzung von Fällen; Interviewdatum (Jahr, Monat, Tag); Gewicht; Erhebungsverfahren; Land der Datenerhebung (Ländercode ISO 3166, Ländercode/Sample ISO 3166; Ländercode Präfix ISO 3166).
Das International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) ist ein länderübergreifendes, fortlaufendes Umfrageprogramm, das jährlich Erhebungen zu Themen durchführt, die für die Sozialwissenschaften wichtig sind. Das Programm begann 1984 mit vier Gründungsmitgliedern - Australien, Deutschland, Großbritannien und den Vereinigten Staaten - und ist inzwischen auf fast 50 Mitgliedsländer aus aller Welt angewachsen. Da die Umfragen auf Replikationen ausgelegt sind, können die Daten sowohl für länder- als auch für zeitübergreifende Vergleiche genutzt werden. Jedes ISSP-Modul konzentriert sich auf ein bestimmtes Thema, das in regelmäßigen Zeitabständen wiederholt wird. Details zur Durchführung der nationalen ISSP-Umfragen entnehmen Sie bitte der Dokumentation. Die vorliegende Studie konzentriert sich auf Fragen zu Religion und religiöser Identität.
The module was administered as a post-election interview. The resulting data are provided along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables in a single dataset.
CSES Variable Table The list of variables is being provided on the CSES Website to help in understanding what content is available from CSES, and to compare the content available in each module.
Themes:
MICRO-LEVEL DATA:
Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors; election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post-election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); mode of interview; gender of interviewer; date questionnaire administered; primary electoral district of respondent; number of days the interview was conducted after the election; language of questionnaire.
Demography: year and month of birth; gender; education; marital status; union membership; union membership of others in household; business association membership, farmers´ association membership; professional association membership; current employment status; main occupation; socio economic status; employment type - public or private; industrial sector; current employment status, occupation, socio economic status, employment type - public or private, and industrial sector of spouse; household income; number of persons in household; number of children in household under the age of 18; number of children in household under the age of 6; attendance at religious services; religiosity; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; region of residence; race; ethnicity; rural or urban residence; primary electoral district; country of birth; year arrived in current country.
Survey variables: perception of public expenditure on health, education, unemployment benefits, defense, old-age pensions, business and industry, police and law enforcement, welfare benefits; perception of improving individual standard of living, state of economy, government's action on income inequality; respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; vote choice (presidential, lower house and upper house elections) at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the current and the previous election; difference who is in power and who people vote for; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of parties on the left-right-scale and/or an alternative scale; self-assessment on a left-right-scale and an optional scale; satisfaction with democracy; party identification; intensity of party identification, institutional and personal contact in the electoral campaigning, in person, by mail, phone, text message, email or social networks, institutional contact by whom; political information questions; expected development of household income in the next twelve month; ownership of residence, business or property or farm or livestock, stocks or bonds, savings; likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month; spouse likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month.
DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA: number of seats contested in electoral district; number of candidates; number of party lists; percent vote of different parties; official voter turnout in electoral district.
MACRO-LEVEL DATA: election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout; party of the president and the prime minister before and after the election; number of portfolios held by each party in cabinet, prior to and after the most recent election; size of the cabinet after the most recent election; number of parties participating in election; ideological families of parties; left-right position of parties assigned by experts and alternative dimensions; most salient factors in the election; fairness of the election; formal complaints against national level results; election irregularities reported; scheduled and held date of election; irregularities of election date; extent of election violence and post-election violence; geographic concentration of violence; post-election protest; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; existing electoral alliances; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement and types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; votes cast; voting procedure; voting rounds; party lists close, open, or flexible; transferable votes; cumulated votes if more than one can be cast; compulsory voting; party threshold; unit for the threshold; freedom house rating; democracy-autocracy polity IV rating; age of the current regime; regime: type of executive; number of months since last lower house and last presidential election; electoral formula for presidential elections; electoral formula in all electoral tiers (majoritarian, proportional or mixed); for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; linked electoral segments; dependent formulae in mixed systems; subtypes of mixed electoral systems; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; fused vote; size of the lower house; GDP growth (annual percent); GDP per capita; inflation, GDP Deflator (annual percent); Human development index; total population; total unemployment; TI corruption perception index; international migrant stock and net migration rate; general government final consumption expenditure; public spending on education; health expenditure; military expenditure; central government debt; Gini index; internet users per 100 inhabitants; mobile phone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants; fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants; daily newspapers; constitutional federal structure; number of legislative chambers; electoral results data available; effective number of electoral and parliamentary parties.
The dataset is composed of the entire universe of sanctions regimes imposed by the UN, US and EU in the period from 1990 to 2010, including those sanctions regimes that were in place by 1990, targeting a country, its leadership and entities associated with it. Episodes which are still on-going are also recorded. Included are all sanctioned countries which have been coded – at least – at the start of sanction episodes as "autocratic regimes" by the Hadenius/Teorell/Wahman dataset on authoritarian regimes (2012).
Das CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) bringt die bestehenden eigenständigen CSES-Module (CSES-Module 1-5 inklusive) zu einem Längsschnitt- und harmonisierten Datensatz zusammen. Der Datensatz wurde vom CSES Secretariat erstellt und umfasst über 395.000 befragte Personen, 230 Wahlen in 59 Ländern, mehr als 800 politische Parteien und ermöglicht die längsschnittliche Erforschung des Wahlverhaltens. Alle Daten, die im CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) enthalten sind, wurden zwischen 1996 und 2021 erhoben und sind in den eigenständigen CSES-Modulen verfügbar - wurden jedoch für das IMD harmonisiert.
Hervorhebenswerte Neuerungen des IMD-Datensatzes sind harmonisierte Parteicodes, die für jedes Land über die CSES-Module hinweg harmonisiert wurden, sowie Data Bridging Variablen, die es ermöglichen, CSES-Daten mit anderen gängigen Datensätzen in den Sozialwissenschaften zusammenzuspielen. Das CSES IMD wird phasenweise veröffentlicht, wobei die erste Version im Dezember 2018 bereitgestellt wurde.
Weitere Informationen zum CSES IMD sind im IMD Stimulus Paper und auf der CSES-Website verfügbar.
We present a data set on authoritarian regimes' claims to legitimacy that is based on leading experts' assessments of 98 states for the period 1991–2010. The experts assessed these regimes on the basis of six conceptually distinguishable but interlinked claims to legitimacy – namely (1) foundational myth, (2) ideology, (3) personalism, (4) international engagement, (5) procedural mechanisms and (6) performance. For the survey, we contacted approximately 800 renowned international and local experts. They were selected on the basis of their publication records, their local expertise and their work for high-quality country-based indices, research institutes, and/or high-profile think tanks. 273 online questionnaires were completed. We collected expert assessments for the most recent non-democratic regime (as of 2013, the year of assessment). The survey comprised questions covering the strength of a regime's six legitimation strategies, based on a six-point scale ranging from 0-5. In addition, the dataset includes information regarding the number of experts per country and the experts' average confidence in answering the questions on the respective country.
Die European Values Study (EVS) und die World Values Survey (WVS) sind zwei groß angelegte, länderübergreifende und längsschnittliche Umfrage-Forschungsprogramme. Sie umfassen eine große Anzahl von Fragen zu moralischen, religiösen, gesellschaftlichen, politischen, beruflichen und familiären Werten, die seit Anfang der achtziger Jahre repliziert wurden.
Beide Organisationen vereinbarten, ab 2017 bei der gemeinsamen Datenerhebung zusammenzuarbeiten. Der EVS war verantwortlich für die Planung und Durchführung von Umfragen in europäischen Ländern unter Verwendung des EVS-Fragebogens und der methodischen Richtlinien des EVS. Der WVSA war für die Planung und Durchführung von Umfragen in Ländern außerhalb Europas verantwortlich, wobei der WVS-Fragebogen und die methodischen Richtlinien des WVS verwendet wurden. Beide Organisationen entwickelten ihre Entwürfe für Master-Fragebögen unabhängig voneinander. Die gemeinsamen Items definieren den gemeinsamen Kern beider Fragebögen.
Der Gemeinsame EVS/WVS wird aus den beiden Quellendatensätzen des EVS und des WVS erstellt: - European Values Study 2017 Integrated Dataset (EVS 2017), ZA7500 Data file Version 5.0.0, doi:10.4232/1.13897 (https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13897). - World Values Survey: Round Seven–Country-Pooled Datafile. Version 5.0.0, doi: 10.14281/18241.20
The module was administered as a post-election interview. The resulting data are provided along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables in a single dataset.
CSES Variable List The list of variables is being provided on the CSES Website to help in understanding what content is available from CSES, and to compare the content available in each module.
Themes:
MICRO-LEVEL DATA:
Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors; election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post-election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); mode of interview; gender of interviewer; date questionnaire administered; primary electoral district of respondent; number of days the interview was conducted after the election; language of questionnaire.
Demography: year and month of birth; gender; education; marital status; union membership; union membership of others in household; business association membership, farmers´ association membership; professional association membership; current employment status; main occupation; socio economic status; employment type - public or private; industrial sector; current employment status, occupation, socio economic status, employment type - public or private, and industrial sector of spouse; household income; number of persons in household; number of children in household under the age of 18; number of children in household under the age of 6; attendance at religious services; religiosity; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; region of residence; race; ethnicity; rural or urban residence; primary electoral district; country of birth; year arrived in current country.
Survey variables: perception of public expenditure on health, education, unemployment benefits, defense, old-age pensions, business and industry, police and law enforcement, welfare benefits; perception of improving individual standard of living, state of economy, government's action on income inequality; respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; vote choice (presidential, lower house and upper house elections) at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the current and the previous election; difference who is in power and who people vote for; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of parties on the left-right-scale and/or an alternative scale; self-assessment on a left-right-scale and an optional scale; satisfaction with democracy; party identification; intensity of party identification, institutional and personal contact in the electoral campaigning, in person, by mail, phone, text message, email or social networks, institutional contact by whom; political information questions; expected development of household income in the next twelve month; ownership of residence, business or property or farm or livestock, stocks or bonds, savings; likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month; spouse likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month.
DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA: number of seats contested in electoral district; number of candidates; number of party lists; percent vote of different parties; official voter turnout in electoral district.
MACRO-LEVEL DATA: election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout; party of the president and the prime minister before and after the election; number of portfolios held by each party in cabinet, prior to and after the most recent election; size of the cabinet after the most recent election; number of parties participating in election; ideological families of parties; left-right position of parties assigned by experts and alternative dimensions; most salient factors in the election; fairness of the election; formal complaints against national level results; election irregularities reported; scheduled and held date of election; irregularities of election date; extent of election violence and post-election violence; geographic concentration of violence; post-election protest; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; existing electoral alliances; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement and types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; votes cast; voting procedure; voting rounds; party lists close, open, or flexible; transferable votes; cumulated votes if more than one can be cast; compulsory voting; party threshold; unit for the threshold; freedom house rating; democracy-autocracy polity IV rating; age of the current regime; regime: type of executive; number of months since last lower house and last presidential election; electoral formula for presidential elections; electoral formula in all electoral tiers (majoritarian, proportional or mixed); for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; linked electoral segments; dependent formulae in mixed systems; subtypes of mixed electoral systems; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; fused vote; size of the lower house; GDP growth (annual percent); GDP per capita; inflation, GDP Deflator (annual percent); Human development index; total population; total unemployment; TI corruption perception index; international migrant stock and net migration rate; general government final consumption expenditure; public spending on education; health expenditure; military expenditure; central government debt; Gini index; internet users per 100 inhabitants; mobile phone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants; fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants; daily newspapers; constitutional federal structure; number of legislative chambers; electoral results data available; effective number of electoral and parliamentary parties.
The module was administered as a post-election interview. The resulting data are provided along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables in a single dataset.
CSES Variable Table The list of variables is being provided on the CSES Website to help in understanding what content is available from CSES, and to compare the content available in each module.
Themes:
MICRO-LEVEL DATA:
Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors; election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post-election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); mode of interview; gender of interviewer; date questionnaire administered; primary electoral district of respondent; number of days the interview was conducted after the election; language of questionnaire.
Demography: year and month of birth; gender; education; marital status; union membership; union membership of others in household; business association membership, farmers´ association membership; professional association membership; current employment status; main occupation; socio economic status; employment type - public or private; industrial sector; current employment status, occupation, socio economic status, employment type - public or private, and industrial sector of spouse; household income; number of persons in household; number of children in household under the age of 18; number of children in household under the age of 6; attendance at religious services; religiosity; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; region of residence; race; ethnicity; rural or urban residence; primary electoral district; country of birth; year arrived in current country.
Survey variables: perception of public expenditure on health, education, unemployment benefits, defense, old-age pensions, business and industry, police and law enforcement, welfare benefits; perception of improving individual standard of living, state of economy, government's action on income inequality; respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; vote choice (presidential, lower house and upper house elections) at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the current and the previous election; difference who is in power and who people vote for; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of parties on the left-right-scale and/or an alternative scale; self-assessment on a left-right-scale and an optional scale; satisfaction with democracy; party identification; intensity of party identification, institutional and personal contact in the electoral campaigning, in person, by mail, phone, text message, email or social networks, institutional contact by whom; political information questions; expected development of household income in the next twelve month; ownership of residence, business or property or farm or livestock, stocks or bonds, savings; likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month; spouse likelihood to find another job within the next twelve month.
DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA: number of seats contested in electoral district; number of candidates; number of party lists; percent vote of different parties; official voter turnout in electoral district.
MACRO-LEVEL DATA: election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout; party of the president and the prime minister before and after the election; number of portfolios held by each party in cabinet, prior to and after the most recent election; size of the cabinet after the most recent election; number of parties participating in election; ideological families of parties; left-right position of parties assigned by experts and alternative dimensions; most salient factors in the election; fairness of the election; formal complaints against national level results; election irregularities reported; scheduled and held date of election; irregularities of election date; extent of election violence and post-election violence; geographic concentration of violence; post-election protest; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; existing electoral alliances; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement and types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; votes cast; voting procedure; voting rounds; party lists close, open, or flexible; transferable votes; cumulated votes if more than one can be cast; compulsory voting; party threshold; unit for the threshold; freedom house rating; democracy-autocracy polity IV rating; age of the current regime; regime: type of executive; number of months since last lower house and last presidential election; electoral formula for presidential elections; electoral formula in all electoral tiers (majoritarian, proportional or mixed); for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; linked electoral segments; dependent formulae in mixed systems; subtypes of mixed electoral systems; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; fused vote; size of the lower house; GDP growth (annual percent); GDP per capita; inflation, GDP Deflator (annual percent); Human development index; total population; total unemployment; TI corruption perception index; international migrant stock and net migration rate; general government final consumption expenditure; public spending on education; health expenditure; military expenditure; central government debt; Gini index; internet users per 100 inhabitants; mobile phone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants; fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants; daily newspapers; constitutional federal structure; number of legislative chambers; electoral results data available; effective number of electoral and parliamentary parties.
The GSRE 1.0 dataset is based on recently released historical documents from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and improves the coverage and accuracy of state budget data for most authoritarian regimes and some democracies since the end of World War II. The GSRE dataset includes 39 unique indicators covering major aspects of state finance for 161 countries between 1946 and 2006.
Please consult the GSRE website at https://sites.google.com/a/thomaserichter.de/gsre/ for further changes and updates.
