_Cebotari and Vink: Ethnic protest in Europe

Description

This data set was used by Cebotari and Vink (2013), and it was taken here from the associated replication file Cebotari and Vink (2015).

Usage

data(CVR)
data(CVF)

Arguments

Format

A data frame containing 29 cases (ethnic minorities) and the following 6 columns:

DEMOC

Level of democracy

ETHFRACT

Degree of ethnic fractionalization

GEOCON

Territorial concentration

POLDIS

Political discrimination

NATPRIDE

National pride

PROTEST

Ethnopolitical protest

Details

There are two different versions of the Cebotari and Vink data: CVR contains the raw data, and CVF contains the data calibrated to fuzzy-sets.

The causal conditions are:

DEMOC (contextual factor), based on a democracy index ranking countries on a scale from strong autocracies (0) to strong democracies (10). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 2, a crossover of 7 and an inclusion threshold of 9.5.

ETHFRACT (contextual factor), with raw scores ranging from a perfectly homogenous society (0) to a highly fragmented country (1). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 0.495 and an inclusion threshold of 0.8.

GEOCON (group-related factor) with raw data coded as: widely dispersed (0) and primarily urban minorities (1) considered territorially dispersed minorities, and ethnic comunities majoritary in a region (2) and entirely concentrated in one region (3) considered as territorially concentrated minorities. The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 1.25 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

POLDIS (group-related factor) captures discrimination practices toward minority groups that vary from no discrimination (0) to exclusive and repressive policies toward a minority group (4). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 0.75 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

NATPRIDE (group-related factor) with raw scores ranging from ‘not at all proud’ (0) to ‘very proud’ (3). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0.5, a crossover of 1.5 and an inclusion threshold of 2.5.

The outcome is the column PROTEST, measured on a range from 0 to 5 with higher values indicating more intense protest actions. The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0.5, a crossover of 1.5 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

References

Cebotari, V.; Vink, M.P. (2013) “A Configurational Analysis of Ethnic Protest in Europe”. International Journal of Comparative Sociology vol.54, no.4, pp.298-324.

Cebotari, V.; Vink, M.P. (2015) “Replication Data for: A configurational analysis of ethnic protest in Europe”, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PT2IB9, Harvard Dataverse, V2