Search results

Showing 1 – 12 of 12 results.

Curated

Diffusion of Sustainable Agriculture in the Amazon [Brazil]: A Panel Database, 1996-2000 (ICPSR 3948)

Released/updated on: 2005-12-15

Geographic coverage: South America, Brazil, Global

Time period: 1996-01-01--2000-01-01

This study, DIFFUSION OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE IN THE AMAZON [BRAZIL]: A PANEL DATABASE, 1996-2000, is no longer current. Please see DYNAMICS OF HOUSEHOLD LAND USE AND ECONOMIC WELFARE ON THE AMAZON FRONTIER, 1996-2005, RONDONIA, BRAZIL (ICPSR 25322), which includes a third round of panel data (2005), as well as edits and changes to the previous years (1996 and 2000).

This study gathered farm-level panel data in Ouro Preto do Oeste, Rondonia, Brazil, to determine the relationship between household decisions and land use for Amazonian households. This project was initiated in August 1996 when a stratified random sample of 171 farmers in Ouro Preto do Oeste was selected along with 25 households that participate in the Association of Alternative Producers (APA) to investigate the decisions of farmers using slash-and-burn agriculture and others using sustainable methods of farming. The survey questions consisted of inquiries about the household (including age, education level, farming experience, and number of farm animals owned), lot characteristics (including size and division between pasture, forest, agriculture, and agroforestry), harvest of market and subsistence crops, agricultural and other forms of income, and the use of agroforestry and major influences determining farming techniques. Questions about income derived from agriculture provided information about the harvest of all perennial and annual crops, milk harvest and meat harvest, the amount of each item that was sold, and at what price.

Curated

Eurobarometer 66.1: European Values and Societal Issues, Mobile Phone Use, and Farm Animal Welfare, September-October 2006 (ICPSR 21281)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-23

Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, United Kingdom, Spain, Czech Republic, Turkey, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia

Time period: 2006-09-06--2006-10-10

This round of Eurobarometer surveys queried respondents on standard Eurobarometer measures, such as how satisfied they were with their present life, whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, what their expectations were for the next 12 months, and how they viewed the need for societal change. Additional questions focused on the respondents' knowledge of and opinions on the European Union (EU), including how well-informed they felt about the it, what sources of information about the EU they used, whether their country had benefited from being an EU member (or would benefit from being a future member), and the extent of their personal interest in EU matters. Respondents were also asked to provide their opinion on social issues, identify personal and European values, and evaluate whether these values are shared among EU member states. A second major focus for the surveys was on mobile phone use, including roaming. Respondents were asked to evaluate the cost of local mobile phone services versus those services used in other countries and the involvement of the EU in price regulation, to describe their mobile phone access billing plan, and to identify mobile services they used most frequently while abroad. For a third major area of focus, the survey asked respondents about their knowledge of animal welfare, their opinions about its practice and application during food production and importation, the availability and purchase of animal welfare-friendly food products, labeling and signage indicating the source of food products, and financial compensation of farmers who farm animals in animal friendly conditions. In addition, respondents were asked their opinion in regard to the role of the EU and the United States, and the position of the EU as compared to the United States, in regard to several social issues. Demographic and other background information includes respondent's age, gender, nationality, national provenance, marital status, left-to-right political self-placement, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, religion and religious involvement, as well as household composition, ownership of a fixed or mobile telephone and other durable goods, type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).

Curated

Eurobarometer 66.3: Social Reality, E-Communications, Common Agricultural Policy, Discrimination and the Media, and Medical Research, November-December 2006 (ICPSR 21523)

Released/updated on: 2010-06-16

Time period: 2006-11-17--2006-12-19

This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the Standard Eurobarometer measures and queried respondents on the following major areas of focus: (1) social reality, (2) e-communications, (3) Common Agricultural Policy, (4) discrimination and the media, and (5) medical research. For the first area of focus, a sequence of questions covered a broad spectrum in terms of social reality, asking the respondents to evaluate their life and job satisfaction, work environment, confidence in their job skills, ability to keep or find a job, and what they expected would happen to their jobs in the near future, e.g., promotion, job loss, relocation, and pensions. Respondents were then asked their opinions on the effectiveness of social welfare, which social issues they considered most important, whether they had or wanted children, how the presence of minority groups affect their countries in a cultural and economic sense, and what necessities are required in order to get ahead in life. The second major focus called for respondents to provide information on the availability, or lack there of, of each of these communication systems: television, fixed telephone, mobile phones, and Internet in their household. Respondents were asked to share reasons why they owned or did not own certain systems, including telecommunication bundles, and to explain how accessible the systems were to their household. Respondents also were asked to assess the performance of each system, to share their expectations as consumers, and to rate the effectiveness of their service providers and the available features (e.g., personal data protection, costs, tariffs, and flexibility with account changes). Respondents indicated, from lists of service providers included in the survey, the specific provider they used for each communication system they used. Respondents answered additional questions about viruses and spam, and how they dealt with such issues, as well as their knowledge of the phone numbers to contact in case of emergencies. Only one question was asked in the next topic as respondents were shown a European label and asked what it symbolized. For the third major area of focus, the survey asked respondents about their knowledge of and their interest in learning about the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Respondents also were asked their opinions on the importance of agriculture and rural development in their countries, what the European Union's (EU) main priorities should be in terms of CAP, and the effectiveness of its role in policy development. Respondents were further asked if the EU's reduction of the subsidy for farmers was justified if farmers failed to attend to their responsibilities and rules of policy, and whether the current amount of budgeting for agriculture was adequate. The fourth major topic focused on people's opinions about discrimination and the media. Respondents were requested to assess the importance of the media's role in combating discrimination and the particular actions the media may use to do this. The survey further asked respondents how they felt about viewing people of different ethnic origins on television, and the media's use of ethnic origin or religious affiliation when discussing people. Also, respondents shared whether they believed the media contributed to the creation of ethnic tensions between different communities. For the fifth and final topic, the survey queried respondents about their knowledge of and interest in scientific research, their access to information on science and subjects of interest (e.g., exhibitions, lectures, professors, doctors, family, and periodicals), and whether they were aware of the projects funded by the EU. Demographic and other background information include respondent's age, gender, nationality, origin of birth (personal and parental), marital status, left-to-right political self-placement, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, and ownership of a fixed or a mobile telephone and other durable goods. In addition, country-specific data include the type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).

Curated

Eurobarometer 68.2: European Union Policy and Decision Making, Corruption, Civil Justice, E-Communications, Agriculture, and Environmental Protection, November 2007-January 2008 (ICPSR 25162)

Released/updated on: 2011-04-25

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: 2007-11-09--2008-01-16

This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the Standard Eurobarometer measures and queried respondents on the following major areas of focus: (1) European Union policy and decision-making, (2) corruption, (3) civil justice, (4) e-communications, (5) agriculture, and (6) environmental protection. For the first major focus, European Union (EU) policy and decision-making, respondents were queried about whether more or less decision-making should take place at the EU level in regards to the following topics: asylum and migration policy, exchange of police and judicial information between member states, the fight against drug abuse, the control of external borders of the EU, the fight against terrorism, and the promotion and protection of fundamental rights, including children's rights. Of these, respondents were asked which topics they thought should be the three priorities of the EU, which topics they felt well informed on, and which topics they would like to be better informed. For the second major focus, corruption, respondents were asked whether they agreed that corruption is a major problem in their country and a major problem in local, regional, national, and EU institutions. They also answered questions regarding how widespread they thought bribery and abuse of power were, if in the last 12 months they had been asked or expected to pay a bribe for services, whether they agreed that most corruption is caused by organized crime, and whose responsibility it is to prevent and fight corruption. For the third major focus, civil justice, respondents were asked if they had ever been involved in civil justice procedures in another EU member state, and what their opinion was about the ease of accessing civil justice outside of their own country. Respondents were also asked if additional measures should be taken to assist in access to civil justice in another EU member state, what their main concerns were about the procedures, and their preference for contract terms in purchasing products in other EU member states. In addition, respondents were queried about whether there should be uniform procedures in the EU for civil and commercial claims, if rulings made in one member state should freely apply in another member state, the main difficulties in enforcing rulings in another member state, if the EU should intervene in the enforcement of civil court rulings between member states, and the usefulness of having access to civil justice in another member state via the Internet. For the fourth major focus, e-communications, respondents provided information on the availability within their own households of each of the following communication systems: television, fixed telephone, mobile phones, and the Internet. Respondents were asked to identify reasons why they owned or did not own certain systems, including television, fixed/mobile phones, and telecommunication bundles, the accessibility of these systems in their household, their use of public payphones and telephone directories, and their knowledge of emergency service numbers. In addition, respondents assessed the performance of each system, shared their expectations as consumers, and rated the effectiveness of their service providers and available features of the systems (e.g., costs, tariffs, and flexibility with account changes). For the fifth major focus, agriculture, respondents shared their opinions about the importance of agriculture in the EU, their knowledge of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), whether they wanted more information about CAP, and from what sources they would gather that information. The survey also asked what should be the main priorities of the EU in terms of CAP, how well CAP fulfills its role, and what the main responsibilities of farmers should be. Respondents were further questioned in regard to the EU's reduction of the subsidy for farmers, what their opinions were about trade barriers, and whether the current amount of budgeting for agriculture was adequate. For the sixth major focus, environmental protection, queries included how important environmental protection was, what was meant by "the environment," what were the main environmental issues that worried them, how informed they felt about the environment, what issues they would like more information on, their main sources of environmental information, and who they trusted the most for information on environmental issues. In addition, respondents were queried about the best way to evaluate progress in environmental protection, the comparison of environmental protection versus economic competitiveness, personal efforts to protect the environment, what should be the priorities of citizens in daily life, and how environmental decisions should be made by government and by public authorities. Further questions included what the most effective way to tackle environmental problems should be, whether an EU civil protection force should be set up, and their opinions about the labeling of environmentally friendly products and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Demographic and other background information includes age, gender, nationality, origin of birth (personal and parental), marital status, left-right political self-placement, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, ownership of other durable goods, Internet use, type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (in select countries).

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 72.5: E-Communications, Agriculture, Geographical and Labor Market Mobility, and Knowledge of Antibiotic Use, November-December 2009 (ICPSR 29842)

Released/updated on: 2013-07-10

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: 2009-11-13--2009-12-09

This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the Standard Eurobarometer measures and queried respondents on the following major areas of focus: (1) e-communications, (2) agriculture, (3) geographical and labor market mobility, and (4) knowledge of antibiotic use. The first major area of focus, e-communications, dealt with the nature, frequency, and quality of e-communications in the household. All respondents were asked whether they owned a fixed or mobile telephone and other goods, and about the number of different types of mobile phone access in the household. For those respondents with a personal mobile telephone, the survey asked about their mobile phone subscription services and how much they pay for mobile phone service as compared to two years ago. Respondents with fixed telephone access expressed their opinion about their landline phone services, and those with no fixed telephone access were asked why they chose not to have a fixed phone line, and how often and why they use public payphones. In addition, respondents were asked which type of services the household used to receive television and Internet in their homes. Respondents with Internet access were asked about accessing the Internet anytime and through what methods, the quality of their Internet service, and whether or not they had ever considered changing Internet service providers. Those without broadband or any Internet access were asked why they had chosen not to have broadband access or any Internet access in their homes. Finally, participants were asked about the confidentiality of the data they provide to telecom companies and social networking Web sites, use of social networking Web sites and telephone directories, whether they would consider buying a technology bundle, and their opinions about communication packages and e-communications services. For the second major area of focus, agriculture, the survey queried participants on the importance of and their knowledge about agriculture, including agricultural policy, who should address certain agricultural issues and which issues should be a main priority of the European Union (EU). They were also asked to evaluate the EU's current and potential future actions on agriculture, the main responsibilities and roles of farmers, the most important reasons for maintaining agriculture in the EU, and whether or not they thought the current economic support measures in place for farmers are appropriate. The respondents were also presented questions about agriculture in relation to climate change. The third major area of focus, geographical and labor market mobility, queried participants on their opinions about moving abroad, including whether they had personally done so for education or employment, and whether family or friends had ever lived or worked abroad. Respondents who lived or worked in another country were asked how often they commuted across the border, which country they had visited, the duration of their last stay, the general type of work done, and how they found that job. Respondents who were retired were asked about whether they envisage to work outside their country in the future, how soon they would be likely to work there, and the type of employment that interests them in that country. In addition, they were asked to identify which countries they would prefer to work in, why they prefer these countries, the length of time they intend to work outside their own country, and whether they had taken any steps to move to another country. If these respondents were moving to a specific country, the survey inquired whether friends or relatives could supply them with information about the country, whether they would move there alone or with other people, and how they would go about finding a job in another country. All respondents were asked whether they would move abroad if they were unemployed and having difficulties finding a job, the income they would need in order to take a job in another country, the type of commute to work preferred, and the chances of finding a job outside their own country. Respondents were then asked about their knowledge of EURES, the Europe-wide network of public employment services, which employment service they would find useful, what reasons might encourage or discourage them from working abroad, and what difficulties they may encounter when working abroad. The survey queried respondents on their opinion of pension payments and health care after retirement, reimbursement for medical treatment by their national health service, and their awareness and use of the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC). For the fourth and final major area of focus, knowledge of antibiotic use, participants were asked if they had taken antibiotics within the last year, how they obtained the last course of antibiotics they used, and the reason for last taking antibiotics. They were asked about their knowledge of antibiotic use, whether they had received any information about not taking antibiotics unnecessarily and the source of this information, whether this information had changed their views on antibiotics and how so, and which sources would provide trustworthy information on antibiotics. Demographic and other background information includes age, gender, nationality, occupation, marital status, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, difficulties in paying bills, level in society, Internet use, type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (in select countries).

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 75.3: Europe 2020, Financial and Economic Crisis, European Union Budget, and the Common Agricultural Policy, May 2011 (ICPSR 34545)

Released/updated on: 2015-08-13

Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, United Kingdom, Spain, Czech Republic, Turkey, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Macedonia, Germany, Montenegro, Estonia

Time period: 2011-05-06--2011-05-26

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 includes the standard modules and covers the following special topics: (1) Europe 2020 strategy, (2) the financial and economic crisis, (3) European Union budget, and (4) the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Questions pertain to economic governance in the EU, the EU growth strategy, importance of financial initiatives, and EU citizenship. Other questions address knowledge, preferences, and assessment of EU funds, as well as opinions on EU Objectives. Respondents were asked opinions on farming practices, thoughts on upper limits of direct payments, agricultural products and foodstuffs, as well as opinions on agricultural policy.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status and parental relations, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, left-right political self-placement, household composition, ownership of a fixed or mobile telephone and other goods, 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

Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 80.2: Climate Change, Agriculture, Healthcare, and Physical Activity, November-December 2013 (ICPSR 36627)

Released/updated on: 2017-05-12

Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Great Britain, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Northern Ireland, Spain, Czech Republic, Belgium, European Union, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia

Time period: 2013-11-02--2013-12-02

This round of Eurobarometer surveys covered the following special topics: (1) Climate Change, (2) Agriculture, (3) Healthcare, and (4) Physical Activity. Respondents' opinions were collected regarding how serious an issue they considered climate change, who within the EU is responsible for addressing it, and what personal actions they have taken to fight climate change. Respondents were also questioned about the importance of agriculture in the EU, their opinions on agricultural policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the role of farmers in the EU, and the labeling of the place of origin for meat and dairy products. Additional questions were asked regarding patient safety, the quality of health care in the respondent's country compared to other countries, information sources used to assess the quality of hospitals, if the respondent or a family member had a surgical procedure, and whether the respondent or a family member experienced an adverse event when receiving health care. Lastly, respondents were queried about their level of physical activity, including how often and how vigorously they participated in activities, their opinions of exercise, how much time they spend sitting on an average day, any issues that prevent them from being physically active, and whether they volunteer in sporting activities.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status, occupation, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, ownership of various goods, 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

Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 84.2: E-Communications in the Household, Awareness and Perception of Europeans about EU Customs, Europeans, Agriculture and the Common Agricultural Policy, October 2015 (ICPSR 36669)

Released/updated on: 2017-12-14

This round of Eurobarometer surveys covers the following special topics: (1) E-Communications and the Digital Single Market, (2) Awareness and Perceptions of Europeans about EU Customs, and (3) EU Citizens, Agriculture, and the Common Agricultural Policy. Respondents were queried as to their use of telephones and digital electronics, the importance of specific factors in choosing to subscribe to an Internet connection, paid services that can be accessed via the Internet, bundling Internet connection with other services, and switching communication service providers. Questions were also asked regarding respondents' perceptions of EU customs authorities and their activities, the role of EU customs authorities, and how informed respondents were about various aspects of the EU Customs Union. Additional topics included respondents' support of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the primary responsibilities of EU farmers, the effectiveness of the CAP, approval of EU financial support of the CAP, and importance of environmental protection.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status, occupation, political preference, age when stopped full-time education, household composition, ownership of a fixed or mobile telephone and other goods, 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.

Curated

Evaluation of the Agriculture Crime Technology Information and Operation Network (ACTION) in Nine Counties in California, 2004-2005 (ICPSR 4686)

Released/updated on: 2009-05-01

Geographic coverage: United States, California

Time period: 2004-01-01--2005-01-01

The Urban Institute and Florida State University multidisciplinary research team employed a multimethod approach to evaluate the Agricultural Crime, Technology, Information, and Operations Network (ACTION) project. The goal of the research was to provide policymakers, practitioners, program developers, and funders with empirically-based information about whether ACTION works. Two paper-and-pencil, self-administered surveys -- one in fall 2004 and the second in fall 2005 -- were sent to samples of farmers in the nine ACTION counties in California. The researchers identified farms using lists provided by Agricultural Commissioners in each county. The survey instruments asked farmers about experiences with agricultural crime victimization during the 12 months prior to the survey. It also asked questions about characteristics of their farm operations and the activities that they take to prevent agricultural crime. Advance notice of the study was given to farmers through the use of postcards, then surveys were sent to farmers in three waves at one-month intervals, with the second and third waves targeting nonrespondents. The Fall 2004 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 1) contains data on 823 respondents (farms) and the Fall 2005 Agricultural Crime Survey (Part 2) contains data on 818 respondents (farms).

Curated

Iowa Youth and Families Project, 1989-1992 (ICPSR 26721)

Released/updated on: 2011-11-03

Geographic coverage: Iowa, United States

Time period: 1989-01-01--1992-01-01

This data collection contains the first four waves of the Iowa Youth and Families Project (IYFP), conducted in 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992. The Iowa Youth and Families Project was developed from an initial sample of 451 7th graders from two-parent families in rural Iowa. The study was merged with the Iowa Single Parent Project (ISPP) to form the Iowa Family Transitions Project in 1994, when the target youth were seniors in high school. Survey data were collected from the target child (7th grader), a sibling within four years of age of the target child, and both parents. Field interviewers visited families at their homes on several occasions to administer questionnaires and videotape interaction tasks including family discussion tasks, family problem-solving tasks, sibling interaction tasks, and marital interaction tasks.

The Household Data files contain information about the family's financial situation, involvement in farming, and demographic information about household members.

The Parent and the Child Survey Data files contain responses to survey questions about the quality and stability of family relationships, emotional, physical, and behavioral problems of individual family members, parent-child conflict, family problem-solving skills, social and financial support from outside the home, traumatic life experiences, alcohol, drug, and tobacco use, and opinions on topics such as abortion, parenting, and gender roles. In addition, the Child Survey Data files include responses collected from the target child and his or her sibling in the study about experiences with puberty, dating, sexual activity, and risk-taking behavior.

The Problem-Solving Data files contain survey data collected from respondents about the family interactions tasks.

The Observational Data files contain the interviewers' observations collected during these tasks.

Demographic variables include sex, age, employment status, occupation, income, home ownership, religious preference, frequency of religious attendance, as well as the ages and sex of all household members and their relationship to the head of household. Demographic information collected on the parents also includes their birth order within their family, the ages and political philosophy of their parents, the sex, age, education level, and occupation of their siblings, and the country of origin of their ancestors.

Curated

The Justice of Land in a Land of Injustice, 2004 (ICPSR 30102)

Released/updated on: 2011-11-29

Geographic coverage: Africa, South Africa, Global

Time period: 2004-02-11--2004-10-07

The Justice of Land in a Land of Injustice study was conducted in South Africa. This study examined the lingering effects of Apartheid, with a focus on land distribution. Respondents were asked about their media usage, their interest in politics, whether they discussed politics with others, the general economic situation in South Africa, and their family's standard of living. They were then asked about their relationships with other people, including whether they got along with those with differing opinions, viewpoints, and values. Respondents were also asked about property rights. Questions included whether the land rights of the wealthy should be reduced, if community rights were more important than individual rights, if only property owners should be allowed to vote, if people had a right to land they had lived on for a long time despite not owning it, whether people should receive compensation if their land should be taken away for land reform, the possible consequences of taking away land rights, if land should be taken away from certain groups only, or whether all land right claims should be denied. Respondents were queried about civil rights and freedoms. Questions included how important rights such as free speech, the right to protest, and the right to land ownership were to them. They were also asked whether it was acceptable for the police to search houses without permission in order to fight crime and if sometimes it would be necessary to ignore the law to solve problems. Respondents were then asked to list the groups they do and do not identify with, and how they felt about being a member of a group. They were asked to self-categorize into groups and then queried about their interactions and relations with other groups. They were asked how much contact they had with other groups and how many of their "true" friends were members of different groups. Respondents were also asked how well they understood the customs of other groups, if they were uncomfortable being around or sharing the same political party with a group, and if South Africa would be better off if other groups were not present. Next, respondents were asked about Apartheid. Questions included how many Black people were harmed by Apartheid, if large companies both inside and outside of South Africa were to blame for the harm done, and whether these companies should be forced to pay for the harm they caused under Apartheid. Additionally, they were queried about their life under Apartheid compared to their current life, including past experiences such as having to use a pass to move around, and being assaulted by the police. Respondents were also asked about their knowledge of government organizations including the South African Constitutional Court and Parliament, and their satisfaction with these organizations. They were then asked how important certain issues were to them such as drugs, unemployment, and racial reconciliation. Additionally, they were asked about the election of leaders, and whether multi-party elections were effective ways to choose those leaders. Respondents were also asked about the goods they owned and their financial assets. The survey also included several vignettes with scenarios of land disputes, which were read to the respondents. They were then asked their opinions of the possible outcomes of these vignettes. Demographic information included age, year of birth, highest education level completed, language spoken mostly at home, attendance at places of religious worship, religion, employment status, household composition, how long they have lived in their current community, whether that community had a Traditional Leader, ownership of goods, membership in organizations, whether someone close has died of AIDS, has AIDS, or are HIV positive, and province, size, and metropolitan area of residence. Finally, interviewer attributes and observations are included.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Sri Lankan Environmental and Agricultural Decision-making Survey (SEADS), 2015-2017 (ICPSR 37051)

Released/updated on: 2018-06-12

Geographic coverage: Sri Lanka

Time period: 2015-01-01--2017-01-01

The Sri Lankan Environmental and Agricultural Decision-making Survey (SEADS) collected quantitative data from paddy farming households in 24 pre-selected villages in the dry zone of Sri Lanka. These data include information about livelihoods, economic activity, household characteristics, cultivation, and experiences with water scarcity and environmental stress. The objective of SEADS was to collect high quality data that could be used to:

Understand the impacts of water scarcity on farming households throughout the dry zone, and to assess vulnerability to climate change impacts.
Document methods of coping with water scarcity utilized by farmers and communities throughout the dry zone.
Estimate the rate of adoption of agricultural adaptations promoted by governmental and non-governmental organizations and community leaders (e.g., parachute method, low flood depth irrigation, short duration seed varieties.)
Understand what programs or policies may help support farmers to cope with water scarcity in the future.

Demographic variables collected include age, gender, religion, ethnicity, district of origin, education level, and occupation.