Showing 1 – 8 of 8 results.
Curated
The Determinants of Aid in the Post-Cold War Era (ICPSR 21302)
Released/updated on: 2007-11-08
Geographic coverage: Benin, Papua New Guinea, Angola, Cambodia, Sudan, Paraguay, Kazakhstan, Syria, Solomon Islands, Bahamas, Grenada, Mongolia, Latvia, Morocco, Iran, Mali, Panama, Guatemala, Guyana, Chile, Laos, Nepal, Argentina, Georgia (Republic), Ukraine, Tanzania, Seychelles, Zambia, Ghana, Belize, Bahrain, India, Turkey, Namibia, Comoros, South Africa, Central African Republic, Jamaica, Peru, Turkmenistan, Yemen, Vietnam (Socialist Republic), Eritrea, Fiji, Guinea, China (Peoples Republic), Chad, Madagascar, Ivory Coast, Thailand, Western Samoa, Costa Rica, Malawi, Poland, Kuwait, Jordan, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Tunisia, Croatia, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Lebanon, Djibouti, Azerbaijan, Venezuela, Czech Republic, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Saint Lucia, Swaziland, Israel, Tajikistan, Estonia, Cameroon, Malaysia, Global, Oman, Armenia, Gabon, Mozambique, El Salvador, Brazil, Algeria, Slovenia, Lesotho, Tonga, Ecuador, Colombia, Hungary, Moldova, Belarus, Mauritius, Albania, Vanuatu, Senegal, Honduras, Macedonia, Ethiopia, Haiti, Burundi, Singapore, Egypt, Sierra Leone, Bolivia, Russia, Malta, Saudi Arabia, Cape Verde, Pakistan, Gambia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Kyrgyzstan, Saint Kitts-Nevis, Romania, Togo, Niger, Philippines, Rwanda, Uzbekistan, Bangladesh, Nicaragua, Democratic Republic of Congo, Botswana, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Indonesia
The authors estimate the responsiveness of aid to recipient countries' economic and physical needs, civil/political rights, and government effectiveness. They look exclusively at the post-Cold War era and use fixed effects to control for the political, strategic, and other considerations of donors. They find that aid and per capita income have been negatively related, while aid has been positively related to infant mortality, rights, and government effectiveness.
Curated
Global Views 2004: American Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (ICPSR 4137)
Released/updated on: 2006-03-30
Geographic coverage: United States
This study is part of a quadrennial series designed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of the general public and a select group of opinion leaders on matters related to foreign policy, and to define the parameters of public opinion within which decision-makers must operate. Part 1 consists of data acquired from interviews of leaders with foreign policy power, specialization, and expertise. These include Congressional members or their senior staff, university administrators and academics who teach in the area of international relations, journalists and editorial staff who handle international news, administration officials and other senior staff in various agencies and offices dealing with foreign policy, religious leaders, senior business executives from FORTUNE 1,000 corporations, labor presidents of the largest labor unions, presidents of major private foreign policy organizations, and presidents of major special interest groups relevant to foreign policy. For Part 2, the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) conducted its opinion survey of the American general public through the Internet. In particular, this study covers the global United States position, international norms and the use of force, multilateralism and international institutions, international norms and economic relations, and policy attitudes and perceptions of United States leaders and the public. Regarding the global United States position, respondents were asked to give their opinions on threats to the vital interests that most Americans consider critical, the fundamental foreign policy goals that they want to pursue, how much they are willing to spend on foreign policy-related items, whether they favor the United States having military bases overseas in general and their support for stationing troops in various specified countries, their views on the Middle East, how active the United States should be in world affairs, their willingness to take action against terrorism, and their support for diplomatic and other nonmilitary actions to solve conflicts. On the topic of international norms and the use of force, respondents gave their opinions on adhering to traditional norms and empowering the United Nations, preventive action against a state seeking weapons of mass destruction, using force against a state supporting terrorists, the use of nuclear weapons, the use of torture, using force against a state conduction genocide, using force to restore a democratic government, and defending a country that has been attacked. Concerning multilateralism and international institutions, respondents were asked their level of support for collective decision-making through international institutions and for empowering the United Nations, their attitudes toward other major international organizations, their support for international agreements, their desire to seek consensus among nations, and their opinions on the idea of spreading democracy. On the subject of international norms and economic relations, respondents were asked about pursuing free trade with certain conditions, globalization and trade in principle, their support for the trading system and institutions, their concerns about inequities, and their opinions on mitigating the effects of trade, achieving equity in trade, trade as a strategic tool, responsibility for development aid, regional trade agreements, and migration. For the sake of comparison, Parts 1 and 2 include many of the same questions asked of both groups. Background information on respondents includes religion, age, income, education, gender, marital status, and employment status. Part 3 is a special telephone survey of the general public designed to be directly comparable to the telephone survey of 2002.
Curated
Global Views 2004: South Korean Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (ICPSR 4135)
Released/updated on: 2005-02-11
Geographic coverage: South Korea, Global
Time period: 2004-07-05--2004-07-16
The 2004 Global Views Study is the first time the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) has partnered with the East Asia Institute (EAI) to study the relationship between the United States public's and the Korean public's views on foreign policy. This comprehensive study is the joint effort of CCFR and EAI to highlight perceptions of security, use of force, economics, international rules, and other international issues. The study seeks to contribute to the current debate on the United States-South Korea alliance by providing new data and analyses. In an attempt to capture and compare American and South Korean public opinion in the new international setting after the events of September 11 and the Iraq War, the surveys posed many of the same questions in both countries on a broad range of international and bilateral issues. In particular, this study covers global perspectives and United States-South Korea security relations. Regarding global perspectives, respondents were asked to give their opinions on their country taking an active role in the world, threat perceptions, the use of force, international institutions, globalization and trade, and other countries. On the topic of United States-South Korea security relations, respondents were asked to provide their opinions regarding bilateral relations and the strategic alliance with the United States, United States military presence in South Korea, attitudes toward North Korea, the North Korean nuclear crisis, and reunification with North Korea. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, occupation, education, income, and ideological inclination.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Open Budget Survey, 2006-2012 (ICPSR 34932)
Released/updated on: 2014-03-31
Geographic coverage: Middle East, United States, Asia, Europe, North Africa, Caribbean, North America, Global, Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America
The Open Budget Survey evaluated whether central governments in countries around the world provided the public with access to budget information and opportunities to participate in the budget process. Beginning in 2006, the Open Budget Survey is conducted biennially in partnership with independent civil society researchers within each country. To measure the overall commitment of the countries surveyed to transparency and to allow for comparisons among countries, the International Budget Partnership created the Open Budget Index from the Open Budget Survey which assigned a score to each country based on the information it made available to the public throughout the budget process.
Curated
Public Opinion and Foreign Policy in the United States, China, India, Australia, and South Korea, 2006 (ICPSR 4650)
Released/updated on: 2008-07-18
Geographic coverage: South Korea, United States, China (Peoples Republic), Australia, Global, India
The Chicago Council undertakes a large-scale public opinion study every two years that compares American and international public opinion on a wide range of important international issues. A significant part of each biennial survey is additionally dedicated to examining a timely theme. The theme of the 2006 survey was, "The Rise of China and India."
This data collection presents a unique comparison of international attitudes on how the emergence of China and India as economic dynamos and claimants to great power status will affect the global economy, international security, and politics. Moreover, this study sought to assess American public opinion (Part 1, Public Opinion Survey, United States) on a variety of challenges facing the United States today including international terrorism, nuclear proliferation, conflict in the Middle East, the rising economic and political power of Asia, economic competition from abroad, and threats to energy supplies and the environment. This data collection also provides an understanding of how the Chinese (Part 2, Public Opinion Survey, China) and Indian (Part 3, Public Opinion Survey, India) publics view their nations' international challenges and opportunities and their respective roles as emerging great powers. Parallel surveys were also conducted in Australia (Part 4, Public Opinion Survey, Australia) in conjunction with the Lowy Institute for International Policy, and in South Korea (Part 5, Public Opinion Survey, South Korea) in conjunction with the East Asia Institute.
Demographic variables include race, age, gender, religious affiliation, highest level of education, and political identification.
Curated
Voice of the People, 2004 (ICPSR 24681)
Released/updated on: 2009-04-30
Geographic coverage: Cameroon, Malaysia, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Greece, South Korea, Austria, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Luxembourg, Ecuador, Argentina, Georgia (Republic), Japan, Ukraine, India, New Zealand, Canada, Turkey, Taiwan, South Africa, Italy, Macedonia, Peru, Germany, Vietnam (Socialist Republic), Afghanistan, Hong Kong, United States, Bolivia, Russia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Kosovo, Poland, Serbia and Montenegro, France, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Uruguay, Philippines, United Kingdom, Kenya, Switzerland, Spain, Czech Republic, Norway, Denmark, Mexico, Uganda, Israel, Australia, Indonesia
This annual survey, fielded June to December 2004, was conducted in over 50 countries to solicit public opinion on social and political issues. Respondents were asked what they thought was the most important goal for the world as a whole, whether they trusted people from their ethnic group more than people from other ethnic groups, if they heard about various global institutions, and their thoughts of these institutions. They were also asked for their overall opinion of various countries. Respondents were asked to give their opinion on other issues such as globalization, terrorism, and democracy. They were also asked questions concerning the United States. These included whether they think American foreign policy has a positive effect or negative effect on their country, whether the United States plays a positive, negative, or neutral role in the growth of the world economy, the role the United States plays in keeping peace in the world, the role the United States plays in the fight against poverty in the world, and the role the United States plays in the protection of the environment. Additional questions addressed respondents' thoughts on whether their country was governed by the will of the people and whether elections were free and fair. Demographic information includes sex, age, education level, employment status, religious preference, household income, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).
Curated
Worldviews 2002: American and European Public Opinion on Foreign Policy (ICPSR 3821)
Released/updated on: 2004-11-24
Geographic coverage: Netherlands, Great Britain, United States, Poland, Italy, France, Germany, Global
Time period: 2002-06-01--2002-07-01
This study is designed to measure attitudes of the general public toward foreign policy issues. First conducted in 1974, the Chicago Council on Foreign Relation's quadrennial public opinion survey is the most comprehensive and widely cited source of information on United States public and leadership attitudes on international relations and foreign policy. This year, for the first time, the German Marshall Fund of the United States partnered with the Chicago Council to undertake a parallel study in six European countries: Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the Netherlands. In particular, this study covered three topics: perceptions of citizens of the countries and the problems they face, the roles of the United States and the European Union (EU) in the world, and attitudes toward geopolitics and globalization. Regarding perceptions of citizens of the countries and the problems they face, respondents were asked to give their opinions on persisting friendliness of the countries toward each other, common perceptions of threats, support for multilateralism, readiness to use military force, resolve to combat terrorism, and support for NATO and its expansion. On the topic of the roles of the United States and the EU in the world, respondents were asked their feelings about United States leadership in the world, support for the EU playing a more prominent international role, whether the EU should become a superpower, and what role the EU should play militarily in the world. Concerning geopolitics and globalization, respondents were asked their opinions about Iraq, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Russia, the rise of China as a world power, the impact of globalization, and trade. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, position with respect to the liberal-conservative continuum, education, party preference, geographic region, and employment status.
Curated
Worldviews 2002: European Public Opinion on Foreign Policy (ICPSR 3730)
Released/updated on: 2005-01-19
Geographic coverage: Netherlands, Great Britain, Poland, Italy, France, Germany, Global
Time period: 2002-06-01--2002-07-01
This study is part of a larger Worldviews 2002 survey of United States and European foreign policy attitudes undertaken by The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) and the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) (see WORLDVIEWS 2002: AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN PUBLIC OPINION ON FOREIGN POLICY [ICPSR 3821]). The survey included six countries: France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and covered five topics: Europeans' focus on their respective countries' domestic issues, Europe's role on the world stage, European threat perception and the use of force, European views on American foreign policy, and Europe in a globalized world. Regarding focus on domestic issues, respondents were asked to give their opinions on the most important issue facing their country today and on various government programs. On the topic of Europe's role on the world stage, respondents were asked to rate their feelings on various countries as well as the European Union (EU), the influence of various countries, whether the EU or the United States was more important to their own country's vital interests, whether their own country should take an active part in world affairs, their desire for the EU to become a superpower, and what type of role their country should take in the global world. Concerning European threat perceptions and the use of force, respondents were asked about possible threats to their countries' vital interests, how willing they would be to support the use of force in various circumstances, how best to combat terrorism, and their willingness to support an attack on Iraq. On the subject of European views of American foreign policy, respondents were asked to rate the Bush administration's handling of foreign policy, evaluate the impact of the September 11th attacks on American foreign policy, rate their attitudes regarding United States spending on defense and economic assistance, and rate their desire for the United States to exert strong leadership in world affairs. On the subject of Europe in a globalized world, respondents rated their support for international institutions, the relevance of NATO, whether globalization was good or bad for their country, and whether they felt the United States practiced fair trade with Europe. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, liberal-conservative continuum, education, party preference, geographic region, and employment status.