Showing 1 – 6 of 6 results.
Curated
Soft Power in Asia Survey, 2008 (ICPSR 25342)
Released/updated on: 2010-04-05
Geographic coverage: South Korea, United States, Asia, Japan, China (Peoples Republic), Global, Indonesia, Vietnam (Socialist Republic)
Time period: 2008-01-16--2008-03-08
This multicountry public opinion survey, conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in collaboration with the East Asia Institute (South Korea), examines the current and potential use of soft power in East Asia. This survey aimed to refine the concept of soft power, operationalize it into a measurable scientific variable, and contribute to the building of a database on soft power in Asia. For this survey, respondents were asked to examine topics such as the attractiveness of different national cultures and values, the effectiveness of nations as regional leaders and problem-solvers, the affinity of nations as trade partners, levels of human capital, attractiveness of educational institutions, and the emergence of regional identities. Participants also gave their opinions about the growing economic and political integration in East Asia and the impact this has on underlying regional tensions, including how likely there would be a military conflict in East Asia in the next ten years. Similarly, respondents answered queries regarding the economic, military, and political influence of China, Japan, and the United States in Southeast Asia, China and the United States as military threats to each other, China's rise as a leader in Asia, and the military presence of the United States in Asia. Further questions asked about the creation of a free trade area in China, Japan and South Korea, trade and investment among these nations, preferred economic systems, countries' willingness to promote democracy and human rights internationally, the use of diplomacy, and the respect for rule of law and sovereignty of other nations. Finally, participants gave their views on the leadership of international organizations, and the influence of one country's popular culture on another.
Curated
Central and Eastern Eurobarometer 1990-1997: Trends CEEB 1-8 (ICPSR 4153)
Released/updated on: 2005-10-26
Geographic coverage: Romania, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Global, Russia, Armenia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Yugoslavia, Poland, Macedonia, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Germany, Croatia, Estonia
Time period: 1990-01-01--1990-12-31, 1991-01-01--1991-12-31, 1992-01-01--1992-12-31, 1993-01-01--1993-12-31, 1994-01-01--1994-12-31, 1995-01-01--1995-12-31, 1996-01-01--1996-12-31, 1997-01-01--1997-12-31
The Central and Eastern Eurobarometer (CEEB) survey series was carried out on behalf of the European Commission (DG X) between 1990 and 1997 under the direction of Karlheinz Reif (until 1995) and George Cunningham. Administered once per year, the CEEB surveys monitored economic and political change and attitudes toward Europe and the European Union in countries of the region, including Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechoslovakia/Czech Republic, Estonia, GDR/Eastern Germany, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia/FYROM, Moldova, Poland, Romania, European Russia/Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and Yugoslavia. This data collection was compiled from the original eight CEEB surveys and consists of 280 selected trend variables (including some demographic and technical variables) representing 49 trend questions. Trend variables were chosen through an iterative selection process that started with the European Commission's definition of "Trend" questions and included variables that already had been asked in the past surveys at least three times (years) in identical or similar wording. Harmonization of some of these variables was necessary. The general scope of the information gathered pertained to attitudes toward the European Commission, current political and economic questions of the country, and evaluation of democratic and economic reforms. Specific topics included judgment on the general political and economic development of the country, expected development of the economic situation, judgment on one's own financial situation, attitude to the market economy, frequency of political discussions, judgment on economic reforms, satisfaction with democracy, human rights, feeling like a European, attitude to European unification, most important source of information about the EC, EU membership, desired point in time for the country to join the EC, NATO membership, benefits of EU relationship, and left-right self placement. Background variables include age, education level, occupation, right to vote, voting intention, party voted for, size of household, income, national background, native language, region, and size of community.
Curated
Central and Eastern Eurobarometer 8: Public Opinion and the European Union, October-November 1997 (ICPSR 2624)
Released/updated on: 2005-08-04
Geographic coverage: Czech Republic, Latvia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Global, Estonia
Time period: 1997-10-31--1997-11-25
The eighth round of Central and Eastern Eurobarometer surveys was carried out in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Respondents were asked many questions that appeared in earlier surveys in this series. These included items on whether respondents felt that things in their country were going in the right or wrong direction, how satisfied they were with the way democracy was developing and how it was working in their country, and how much respect there now was for human rights. Respondents were also asked to identify the flags of different countries and organizations, to provide their impressions of the aims and activities of the European Union (EU), and to comment on which countries they believed their future was most closely tied to, how they would vote if referenda on the question of their country's membership in the EU and in NATO were held tomorrow, and the main reasons for their votes. Additional questions focused on which groups within their societies would likely benefit or lose out as ties between their country and the EU increased, whether their country or the EU itself benefited the most from the current relationship between the two, the ways they might hear about the activities of the EU, and if they wanted to learn more about what the EU was doing on a variety of economic and social issues. New questions explored whether respondents had ever heard of the United Nations, the European Union, or the Council of Europe, and whether they would be more or less likely to vote for EU membership if their country had first joined NATO. Demographic information collected on respondents covers sex, age, highest level of education completed, occupation, voting status, mother tongue and knowledge of other languages, which party they would vote for should there be a general election held tomorrow, nationality/ethnic background, region of residence, size of locality, and income.
Curated
Central and Eastern Eurobarometer 7: Status of the European Union, October-November 1996 (ICPSR 2296)
Released/updated on: 2005-07-29
Geographic coverage: Romania, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Europe, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Global, Russia, Albania, Armenia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Yugoslavia, Asia, Poland, Macedonia, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Estonia
Time period: 1996-10-25--1996-11-30
The seventh round of Central and Eastern Eurobarometer surveys was carried out in Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and Yugoslavia. Respondents were asked questions that appeared in earlier surveys in this series. These included items on whether respondents felt that things in their country were going in the right or wrong direction, how the financial situation of their household had changed in the last year and how it might change in the next year, how they felt about the creation of a free market economy, how economic reforms were going in their country, how satisfied they were with the way democracy was developing, and how much respect there now was for human rights. Respondents were also queried regarding their impressions of the aims and activities of the European Community after its name was changed to the European Union, which countries they believed their future was most closely tied to, whether their country or the European Union benefited most from the current relationship, their main sources of information about the activities of the Union, and which groups within their societies would likely benefit or lose out as ties between their country and the Union increased. Respondents also provided specific reasons behind their impressions of the aims and activities of the European Union and stated how they would vote if a referendum were held the next day on the questions of membership of the European Union and membership of NATO. Respondents were also asked which party or block they would vote for if a general election were held in their country. Demographic data collected on respondents covers age, highest level of education completed, occupation, voting status, mother tongue and knowledge of other languages, nationality/ethnic background, sex, region, size of locality, and income.
Curated
Central and Eastern Eurobarometer 6: Economic and Political Trends, October-November 1995 (ICPSR 6835)
Released/updated on: 2005-07-06
Geographic coverage: Romania, Hungary, Georgia (Republic), Europe, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Global, Russia, Albania, Armenia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Asia, Poland, Macedonia, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Estonia
Time period: 1995-10-30--1995-11-29
The sixth round of Central and Eastern Eurobarometer surveys was carried out in Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the Ukraine. Respondents were asked questions that appeared in earlier surveys in this series. These included items on whether respondents felt that things in their country were going in the right or wrong direction, how the financial situation of their household had changed in the last year and how it might change in the next year, how they felt about the creation of a free market economy, and how economic reforms were going in their country. Respondents were also asked how satisfied they were with the way democracy was developing, how much respect there now was for human rights, their impressions of the aims and activities of the European Community after its name was changed to the European Union, which countries they believed their future was most closely tied to, whether their country or the European Union benefited most from the current relationship, their main sources of information about the activities of the Union, and which groups within their societies would likely benefit or lose out as ties between their country and the Union increased. Additional topics covered the specific reasons behind the respondents' impressions of the aims and activities of the European Union and their knowledge of the "PHARE" and "TACIS" programs. Respondents also predicted how they would vote if a referendum were held the next day on the questions of membership of the European Union and membership of NATO, and which party or block they would vote for if a general election were held in their country. Demographic data collected on participants include respondent's age, highest level of education completed, occupation, voting status, mother tongue and knowledge of other languages, nationality/ethnic background, sex, region, size of locality, and income.
Curated
Dilemmas of Democracy in the Open Economy: Lessons From Latin America (ICPSR 1305)
Released/updated on: 2004-08-12
Geographic coverage: Latin America
Scholars have usually understood the problem of democratic consolidation in terms of the creation of mechanisms that make possible the avoidance of populist excesses, polarized conflicts, or authoritarian corporatist inclusion that undermined free politics in much of postwar Latin America. This article makes the case that, under contemporary liberal economic conditions, the nature of the challenge for democratization has changed in important ways. Earlier problems of polarization had their roots in the long-present statist patterns of economic organization. By contrast, under free market conditions, democratic consolidation faces a largely distinct set of challenges: the under-articulation of societal interests, pervasive social atomization, and socially uneven political quiescence founded in collective action problems. These can combine to undermine the efficacy of democratic representation, and consequently, regime legitimacy. The article utilizes data from the Latin American region since the 1970s on development, economic reform, and individual and collective political participation to show the effects of a changing state-economy relationship on the consolidation of democratic politics.