Search results

Showing 1 – 2 of 2 results.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 74.3: The European Parliament, Energy Supply, Data Protection and Electronic Identity, Chemical Labeling and Rare Diseases, November-December 2010 (ICPSR 34264)

Released/updated on: 2013-06-21
Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Romania, Hungary, Europe, United Kingdom, Spain, Czech Republic, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia
Time period: 2010-11-25--2010-12-17

The Eurobarometer series is a unique cross-national and cross-temporal survey program conducted on behalf of the European Commission. These surveys regularly monitor public opinion in the European Union (EU) member countries and consist of standard modules and special topic modules. The standard modules address attitudes towards European unification, institutions and policies, measurements for general socio-political orientations, as well as respondent and household demographics. The special topic modules address such topics as agriculture, education, natural environment and resources, public health, public safety and crime, and science and technology.

This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the Standard Eurobarometer measures and queried respondents on the following major areas of focus: (1) the European Parliament (EP), (2) energy supply, (3) data protection and electronic identity, (4) chemical labeling, and (5) rare diseases. For the first major area of focus, the European Parliament, respondents were asked about their knowledge and opinion of the EP, whether the EP should play a more important or less important role, which policies should be given priority by the EP, and which values should be defended by the EP. For the second major area of focus, energy supply, respondents were queried about what goals should be prioritized in energy policies, what energy policies should be adopted, and whether or not there should be a communal European Union (EU) energy policy. Additionally, respondents were asked whether they believed it was in their country's energy security interest to assist other EU member states facing energy supply problems, as well as whether they believed it was desirable that their country provide assistance to other EU member states in the name of European solidarity. For the third major area of focus, questions address activities one performs on the Internet, opinions about types of information and data considered to be personal, types of information disclosed on social networking and online shopping sites and the risks, and measures taken to protect one's identity. Opinions were also collected on how personal information and data are acquired, treated, stored and protected by public and private organizations. For the fourth major area of focus, chemical labeling, respondents were asked about their use and perception of chemical products in various circumstances, how they determine whether or not a chemical product is hazardous, what the proper handling of chemical products is, where respondents find information about the potential dangers of chemical products, who to trust for information about chemical product safety, and whether or not they could correctly identify chemical product warning labels. For the fifth major area of focus, rare diseases, respondents were interviewed about what they believe rare diseases are, whether or not they knew or heard of someone with a rare disease, what society should do about rare diseases, what specific policy responses to rare diseases should be implemented by national health services and the EU as a whole, as well as whether or not they had heard of certain rare diseases.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status and parental relations, left-right political self-placement, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, ownership of a fixed or a mobile telephone, difficulties in paying bills, level in society, and Internet use. In addition, country-specific data includes type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).

Curated

Transnational Relations and Regional Regulation in Ecuador, Peru and Colombia, 1975 (ICPSR 7591)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: South America, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Global
This data collection contains survey data gathered from 90 chemical and metalworking (light engineering) industries in Ecuador, Peru, and Colombia in 1975, five years after the Andean Group (a regional subgroup of the Latin American Free Trade Association) instituted Decision 24, a policy that regulated foreign investment in member countries. The three countries with firms represented in the study were national political economies characterized by different degrees of industrialization and hence different configurations of sociopolitical forces. They were also relatively politically stable during the five-year period before the survey, thereby implying a greater measure of continuity in the application of Decision 24 than was observed in the other Andean Group countries of Chile and Bolivia, or Venezuela, which did not join the Andean Group until 1973. Also, because of the application of Law 444 in Colombia and the General Law of Industries and ITINTEC in Peru, it was anticipated that managers in those two countries would be more conscious of the range of choice available in the selection of technology and that firms would have recently begun to increase the level of in-house R&D activities. The chemical and metalworking industries fell within the ambit of Andean industrial programming activities, so managers in those industries were expected to represent a group of relatively well-informed persons with respect to Andean Group issues. The data were obtained from an orally administered, primarily open-ended questionnaire given to managers of the selected firms. The survey's data measure: (1) the size of the firm in terms of assets, earnings, employment, and sales, (2) the ownership structure of the firm and changes over time, (3) self-evaluation of future market position and development plans, (4) source of technology, including explanation of the choice, cost of technology (royalties), and date for all licenses, (5) R&D activities and expenditures of the firm, (6) firm's relationship to the integrative system (imports from and exports to other Andean countries and the world), and (7) attitudes of firm managers toward Decision 24 and toward attempts by government to regulate Direct Foreign Investment (DFI) and Technology Transfer.