Search Constraints
1 - 5 of 5
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
-
- Type:
- Dataset
- Description/Abstract:
- This is a dataset generated as a part of a research project studying the changing support among European Union (EU) members for the war in Ukraine. The dataset contains a number of conditions (variables) used to conduct fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to test five critical conditions that have shaped the change in public opinion that include economic growth, democratic rule, distance from the front lines, level of energy dependence from Russia and trust in social media. These conditions (or variables) include: Num: Case number in the row MEMBR: EU member state two or three-letter abbreviation WEALTH: GDP per capita in Euro (measured in purchasing power parties) as reported by Eurostat GROWTH: GDP growth in volume based on seasonally adjusted data by Eurostat DEMOCR: the overall score for each EU member’s democracy index for 2022. Data have been drawn from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) 2022 report DISTAN: an average distance (in thousand kilometers) from the geographic center point of the national capital of each EU member-state to the south-western and north-eastern tips of the frontline of the war in Ukraine. I have accepted that the western tip of the frontline is Kinburnsʹka Kosa National Park (Geographic Coordinates: 46°34’37”N 31°30’44”E) and the eastern tip of the frontline is at the village of Topoli in Kharkiv Oblast (Geographic Coordinates: 49°57’52″N, 37°54′31″E). TRADE: volume of trade with Russia per capita in thousand of US Dollars. ENERGO: EU energy dependence on Russia as estimated by the European Commission (from 0 to 100 percent) for 2020. Source: Eurostat. GOVTR: Net trust in national government (difference between the sum of fully trust and partially trust responses and fully distrust and partially distrust responses). MEDIATR: Net trust in social media (difference between the sum of fully trust and partially trust responses and fully distrust and partially distrust responses). CNG_MIL -- change of net support for the financing of the purchase and supply of military equipment to Ukraine, Spring 2022-Spring 2025 CNG_FIN -- change of net support for the financing of support for Ukraine, Spring 2022-Spring 2025 CNG_HUM -- change of net support for providing humanitarian support for the people affected by the war, Spring 2022-Spring 2025 CNG_REF -- change of net support for welcoming in the EU people fleeing the war, Spring 2022-Spring 2025 AVCHNG: Difference in average change of the military, economic, humanitarian and refugee support for Ukraine Spring 2022-Spring 2025. WEALTH1: Calibrated score for national wealth (see paper for details) GROWT1: Calibrated score for economic growth (see paper for details) DEMOCR1: Calibrated score for democracy (see paper for details) DISTAN1: Calibrated score for distance (see paper for details) TRADE1: Calibrated score for trade (see paper for details) RENERGO1: Calibrated score for energy dependence (see paper for details) GOVTR1: Calibrated score for trust in governance (see paper for details) RMEDIATR1: Calibrated score for trust in social media (see paper for details) --------------- NB: File: "Dataset_UkrTime2yr.csv" contains data for the public support during the first two years (24 months) since the whole scale invasion of Ukraine, Spring 2022-Spring 2024 File"Dataset_UkrTime3yr.csv" contains data for the public support during the first three years (36 months) since the whole scale invasion of Ukraine, Spring 2022-Spring 2025
- Creator/Author:
- Ivanov, Ivan
- Submitter:
- Ivan Ivanov
- Date Uploaded:
- 04/27/2025
- Date Modified:
- 03/03/2026
- Date Created:
- 5-01-2024
- License:
- All rights reserved
-
- Type:
- Dataset
- Description/Abstract:
- "Organizational Response to Emerging Threats" is a project that addresses three separate threat areas -- cybersecurity, peacekeeping and energy security. The data collection for cybersecurity and energy security has been completed. As of June 2019, the data collection for peacekeeping is ongoing. The project documents are organized around three topics, reflected in the filenames -- cybersecurity, peacekeeping and energy security. The overall purpose/rationale of this research project is to develop a framework that explains how different international organizations (IOs) respond to various emerging threats in international relations. These threats can vary and include cybersecurity, energy security, food security, environmental security, and others. For the purpose of our study we focus on two major variables explaining organizational response: (1) IOs’ capacity to acquire and deploy organizational assets (also referred to as asset fungibility), and; (2) IOs’ ability to make swift decisions in response to changing internal and external environments. Drawing from primary sources including interviews with NATO and EU officials, we suggest a new model explaining when organizations are better equipped at addressing cyber threats, when they have capacity to response more effectively, and what they could do to improve their organizational responses in this area. The QDR repository contains interviews with policy makers and senior bureaucrats conducted in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 in Brussels, Belgium, and the Hague, the Netherlands. These interviews have been conducted in person or over skype. Approval to conduct interviews has been granted by the University of Cincinnati's IRB (Study ID: 2018-3371.
- Creator/Author:
- Ivanov, Ivan
- Submitter:
- Ivan Ivanov
- Date Uploaded:
- 10/20/2023
- Date Modified:
- 10/20/2023
- Date Created:
- 2019-07-22
- License:
- Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
-
- Type:
- Document
- Description/Abstract:
- The current debates revolving around 5G, Huawei, and how they are resolved, are highly visible indicators of the technology based shifts in the global order which are setting the tone for the 21st century. Currently, it seems that many in the US and the PRC are using Cold War and Thucydides Trap paradigms, with a zero-sum mentality. At least in the case of 5G technology, the UK seems to have taken a more nuanced approach. This article comes as the UK prepares its new National Cyber Security Strategy, reviewing the 5G and cyber security debates surrounding Huawei in a highly interdisciplinary manner, and directing readers to a rich variety of resources. In addition to its analysis of issues and solutions often absent from the discourse, this article’s feature contribution is the argument that the UK can be more than an example of a middle way. Specifically, if the UK scales up and internationalizes its Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Center, perhaps by creating an International Cyber Security Evaluation Center, it can lead its allies and the world in 5G, 6G, cybersecurity, and international relations, filling a vital leadership vacuum.
- Creator/Author:
- Huang, Russell and Turner, Grant
- Submitter:
- Grant Turner
- Date Uploaded:
- 07/08/2020
- Date Modified:
- 07/08/2020
- Date Created:
- June 30, 2020
- License:
- Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
-
- Type:
- Article
- Description/Abstract:
- This analytical paper asks, does the One-China policy shape the People’s Republic of China’s foreign policy? This paper begins by briefly defining the One-China policy and situating it in the respective histories of China and its current incarnation as the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Then, after untangling the often muddled classifications of soft, sharp, and hard power, the question is interrogated in the context of each class of power (Nye, 2004; Nye, 2011; Nye, 2018; Raby, 2019; Walker & Ludwig, 2017). This analytical essay concludes that the PRC does employ predominantly sharp and hard power strategies that are heavily influenced by the One-China policy.
- Creator/Author:
- Turner, Grant
- Submitter:
- Grant Turner
- Date Uploaded:
- 07/07/2020
- Date Modified:
- 07/08/2020
- Date Created:
- August 11, 2019
- License:
- Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
-
- Type:
- Dataset
- Description/Abstract:
- Dataset Summary: This dataset studies the main challenges that students in these institutions faced during the transition from face-to-face (f2f) to remote mode of instruction and the resources that they used to minimize these adversities. In order learn about their experiences during this transition, I surveyed at the end of the Spring Semester students enrolled in two Political Science (POL) classes. The results showed that majority of students struggled with stress caused by moving away from campus and self-quarantine leading to deteriorating mental and physical health. Concerns about student health along with distraction at home were identified as top adversities for student well-being. Survey results also showed that educational resources can have varying impact on student learning in introductory and upper-level courses. For example, lecture notes, power point presentations and online videos can be better resources for remote instruction in an introductory class, while class meetings via video conferencing platforms can be the preferred resource of instruction in upper-level courses. Below is the questionnaire used for this study: Survey Questionnaire: Transition to Remote Instruction During COVID-19 Crisis: Qualtrics Link for POL1080: https://artsciuc.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bd7cF1OF6eNeYBv Qualtrics Link for POL2074: https://artsciuc.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3xegnXy4LFSC2t7 1. As you know, the University of Cincinnati has transitioned from face-to-face to remote instruction for Spring Semester since March 14, 2020 due to COVID-19. Once it was decided to switch to remote instruction, how did you expect that this decision would impact your performance in this class? I thought it would improve my performance I thought it would impair my performance I did not think that it would impact my performance I don’t know 2. Based on your experience with remote instruction, how do you think the new form of instruction impacted your performance in this class? I did better in this class after we switched to remote teaching I did worse in this class after we switched to remote teaching The switch to remote teaching had no impact on my performance I don’t know. 3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “I felt that the instructor in this class provided timely instructions and information about the switch from face-to-face to remote form of content delivery in the class”? Completely agree Partially agree Partially disagree Completely disagree Not sure/ don’t know. 4. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “I felt that the instructor in this class cared about my performance in the class once we switched from face-to-face to remote form of content delivery in the class”? Completely agree Partially agree Partially disagree Completely disagree Not sure/ don’t know. 5. Which of the following course resources (if available) helped you ease the transition from face-to-face to remote instruction (check all that apply)? Online instructional videos created or made available by the instructor Instructor-led class meetings via a web-conferencing platform (e.g. Webex, Zoom, MS Teams, Skype) Meetings with the instructor via a web-conferencing platform (e.g. Webex, Zoom, MS teams, Skype) during their office hours Instructor’s lecture notes and presentation materials (e.g. Power Point Slides) Online quizzes or interactive questions administered via web platforms (e.g. Canvas, Blackboard, Echo 360 or others). Online forums made available for this course Assigned course readings Book publisher’s online resources (websites, book ancillaries, etc.) Supplemental assistance from teaching assistants (e.g. office hours, online sessions, etc.) Supplemental peer-led review sessions (e.g. Learning Assistant Sessions, Supplemental Instruction Sessions, etc.) Group activities with peers enrolled in the class (e.g. study sessions via conference platforms) Others (please list) _________. 6. Which one of the following course resources was most helpful to you in the transition from face-to-face to online mode of content delivery (select only one)? Online instructional videos created or made available by the instructor Instructor-led class meetings via a web-conferencing platform (e.g. Webex, Zoom, MS Teams, Skype) Meetings with the instructor via a web-conferencing platform (e.g. Webex, Zoom, MS teams, Skype) during their office hours Instructor’s lecture notes and presentation materials (e.g. Power Point Slides) Online quizzes or interactive questions administered via web platforms (e.g. Canvas, Blackboard, Echo 360 or others). Online/ web discussion forums made available for this course Assigned course readings Textbook publisher’s online resources (websites, book ancillaries, etc.) Supplemental assistance from teaching assistants (e.g. office hours, online sessions, etc.) Supplemental peer-led review sessions (e.g. Learning Assistant Sessions, Supplemental Instruction Sessions, etc.) Group activities with peers enrolled in the class (e.g. study sessions via web-conferencing platforms) Others (please list) _________. 7. Which of the following, do you think, impacted negatively your performance in this class during the transition from face-to-face to remote instruction (please select all relevant options)? I had to move away from campus in the middle of the semester My physical or mental health deteriorated after we switched to remote instruction I missed face-to-face interaction with the instructor, the TAs and the undergrad assistant (SI) I did not have stable and reliable Internet connection at home I had a lot of distraction at home I lost my job/ income due to the COVID-19 epidemic I had to take an additional job to support myself and/ or my family Self-quarantine and/ or social distancing caused me a lot of stress The news about the COVID-19 epidemic and concerns about my health and the health of my loved ones caused me a lot of stress Other (please list) ___________. 8. Which of the following, do you think, impacted negatively your performance in this class during the transition from face-to-face to remote instruction (please select only one options)? I had to move away from campus in the middle of the semester My physical or mental health deteriorated after we switched to remote instruction I missed face-to-face interaction with the instructor, the TAs and the undergrad assistant (SI) I did not have stable and reliable Internet connection at home I had a lot of distraction at home I lost my job/ income due to the COVID-19 epidemic I had to take an additional job to support myself and/ or my family Self-quarantine and/ or social distancing caused me a lot of stress The news about the COVID-19 epidemic and concerns about my health and the health of my loved ones caused me a lot of stress Other (please list): 9. Based on your experience with this course’s transition from face-to-face to remote instruction for Spring Semester 2020, what aspects of this transition had greatest values for you? Open ended question: 10. Based on your experience with this course’s transition from face-to-face to remote instruction for Spring Semester 2020, what changes would you recommend to ease this transition in the future? Open ended question: 11. What is your gender? Male Female Other/ prefer not to disclose 12. What is your major? Political Science International Affairs Interdisciplinary/ Cyber Strategy and Policy Interdisciplinary/ Law and Society Another major (please specify) 13. What is your class level? First year (freshman) Second year (sophomore) Third year (junior) Fourth year (senior) 14. What is your race or ethnicity? White Black or African American Asian American Indian or Alaska Native Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander International student Other 15. What do you think your grade will be for this course? A or A- B+, B or B- C+, C or C- D+, D or D- F Nor sure/ don't know
- Creator/Author:
- Ivanov, Ivan
- Submitter:
- Ivan Ivanov
- Date Uploaded:
- 05/14/2020
- Date Modified:
- 05/14/2020
- Date Created:
- 2020-05-13
- License:
- All rights reserved
