=========================================================================== COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS (CSES) - MODULE 2 (2001-2006) CODEBOOK: INTRODUCTION FULL RELEASE - DECEMBER 15, 2015 VERSION CSES Secretariat www.cses.org =========================================================================== HOW TO CITE THE STUDY: The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES MODULE 2 FULL RELEASE [dataset]. December 15, 2015 version. doi:10.7804/cses.module2.2015-12-15 These materials are based on work supported by the National Science Foundation (www.nsf.gov) under grant numbers SES-0112029 and SES-0451598, the GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, the University of Michigan, in-kind support of participating election studies, the many organizations that sponsor planning meetings and conferences, and the many organizations that fund election studies by CSES collaborators. Any opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations. =========================================================================== IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING FULL RELEASES: This dataset and all accompanying documentation is the "Full Release" of CSES Module 2 (2001-2006). Users of the Final Release may wish to monitor the errata for CSES Module 2 on the CSES website, to check for known errors which may impact their analyses. To view errata for CSES Module 2, go to the Data Center on the CSES website, navigate to the CSES Module 2 download page, and click on the Errata link in the gray box to the right of the page. =========================================================================== TABLE OF CONTENTS =========================================================================== ))) CSES PROJECT PROFILE >>> CSES MODULE 2 STUDY DESCRIPTION >>> CSES MODULE 2 PLANNING COMMITTEE >>> CSES MODULE 3 PLANNING COMMITTEE >>> CSES MODULE 2 COLLABORATORS >>> CSES MODULE 2 SECRETARIAT >>> MICRO-LEVEL (SURVEY) COMPONENT >>> CSES MODULE 2 COLLABORATOR INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CSES QUESTIONNAIRE >>> DISTRICT-LEVEL COMPONENT >>> MACRO-LEVEL COMPONENT ))) HOW TO USE THE CSES MODULE 2 DOCUMENTATION >>> TYPES OF DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE >>> CODEBOOK CONVENTIONS ))) HOW TO USE THE CSES MODULE 2 DATA FILES ))) SPECIAL DATA NOTES >>> IDENTIFICATION VARIABLES >>> MISSING DATA >>> WEIGHTS >>> FREEDOM STATUS OF ELECTIONS ))) CSES MODULE 2 ELECTION STUDIES >>> LIST OF ELECTION STUDIES INCLUDED IN CSES MODULE 2 >>> OTHER ELECTION STUDIES INCLUDING CSES MODULE 2 ))) ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ALBANIA (2005) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BELGIUM (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BRAZIL (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BULGARIA (2001) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CANADA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CHILE (2005) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - DENMARK (2001) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - FINLAND (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - FRANCE (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - GERMANY (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2005) >>> ELECTOIN SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - HONG KONG (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - HUNGARY (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ICELAND (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - IRELAND (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ISRAEL (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ITALY (2006) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - JAPAN (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - MEXICO (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NORWAY (2001) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PERU (2006) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - POLAND (2001) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PORTUGAL (2005) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ROMANIA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - RUSSIA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SPAIN (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SWEDEN (2002) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2003) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - TAIWAN (2001) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - TAIWAN (2004) >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - UNITED STATES (2004) ))) BIBLIOGRAPHY =========================================================================== ))) CSES PROJECT PROFILE =========================================================================== The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) is a collaborative program of research among election study teams from around the world. Participating countries include a common module of survey questions in their post-election studies. The resulting data are deposited along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables. The studies are then merged into a single, free, public dataset for use in comparative study and cross-level analysis. The research agenda, questionnaires, and study design are developed by an international committee of leading scholars of electoral politics and political science. The design is implemented in each country by their foremost social scientists. By collaborating in this way, the CSES community hopes to forward scientific inquiry into the relationship between electoral institutions and political behavior. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 2 STUDY DESCRIPTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSES Module 2 was in use from 2001 through 2006. It focused on three key theoretical questions. First, it examined the contrasting views of the logic of elections - to what extent are elections a mechanism to hold government accountable, as opposed to a means to ensure that citizens' views are properly represented in the democratic process? Second, the module added a new set of items on citizen engagement and cognition across democratic polities. Third, the module expanded the analyses of the first module to examine how voters' choices are affected by the institutional context within which those choices are made. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 2 PLANNING COMMITTEE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CSES Module 2 Planning Committee was responsible for the design of CSES Module 2, and shared responsibility for its implementation. The following persons were members of the CSES Module 2 Planning Committee: W. Phillips Shively, chair University of Minnesota United States Yun-han Chu National Taiwan University Taiwan Gary Cox University of California - San Diego United States John Curtice University of Strathclyde United Kingdom Amaury de Souza IDESP Brazil Juan Diez-Nicolas ASEP, Complutense University Spain Yilmaz Esmer Bolgazici University Turkey Ashley Grosse Director of Studies (-2001), CSES Secretariat University of Michigan United States Soren Holmberg Goteborg University Sweden David Howell Director of Studies (2001-), CSES Secretariat University of Michigan United States Hans-Dieter Klingemann WZB Germany Marta Lagos Opinion Publica Latinoamericana Chile Radoslaw Markowski Polish Academy of Sciences Poland Ekkehard Mochmann Universitat zu Koln Germany Yoshitaka Nishizawa Doshisha University Japan Virginia Sapiro University of Wisconsin-Madison United States Hermann Schmitt European Election Study and MZES Germany Jacques Thomassen University of Twente Netherlands Gabor Toka Central European University Hungary Bernhard Wessels WZB Germany --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 3 PLANNING COMMITTEE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CSES Module 3 Planning Committee shared responsibility with the CSES Module 2 Planning Committee for the implementation of CSES Module 2. The following persons were members of the CSES Module 3 Planning Committee: Professor Ian McAllister, chair Director, Research School of Social Sciences Australian National University Australia Professor Bernt Aardal The Norwegian Election Studies Norway Dr. Kees Aarts School of Business, Public Administration and Technology, University of Twente The Netherlands Professor John Aldrich Department of Political Science Duke University United States Professor Ulises Beltrán Associate Professor, División de Estudios Políticos, CIDE (Centro de Investigacion y Docencia Economica) Mexico Professor André Blais Département de Science Politique, Université de Montréal Canada Professor Yun-Han Chu Institute of Political Science, Academia Sinica Taiwan Professor Russell Dalton Department of Political Science University of California, Irvine, United States Professor Juan Díez-Nicolás ASEP (Analisis Sociológicos Económicos y Políticos) Spain David A. Howell, ex officio Director of Studies CSES Secretariat, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan United States Professor Ken'ichi Ikeda Department of Social Psychology, The University of Tokyo Japan Christiaan Keulder Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) Namibia Professor Marta Lagos Latinobarómetro, Opinión Pública Latinoamericana Chile Professor Radoslaw Markowski Institute of Political Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences Poland Dr. h.c. Ekkehard Mochmann Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung, Universität zu Köln Germany PD Dr. Hermann Schmitt Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES) Universität Mannheim Germany Professor Michal Shamir Department of Political Science, Tel Aviv University Israel Professor Sandeep Shastri Dean of Research and Social Science International Academy for Creative Teaching, India Dr. Gábor Tóka Political Science Department, Central European University Hungary Professor Jack Vowles Department of Political Studies, University of Auckland New Zealand Prof. Dr. Bernhard Weßels Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) Germany --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 2 COLLABORATORS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CSES project is extremely grateful to our Module 2 collaborators, who raised their own funds to include CSES Module 2 in a nationally representative post-election study in their country or province. Listed collaborators are our contact persons for election studies that appear in the CSES Module 2 full release dataset - they are not necessarily the parties who collected the data. Within each election study, collaborators are presented in alphabetical order. The affiliations listed are current as of the the date when the election study first appeared in the CSES dataset. - Albania (2005) Dr. Altin Ilirjani Albanian Political Science Association / University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill United States - Australia (2004) Prof. Clive Bean School of Humanities and Human Services Queensland University of Technology Australia Dr. Rachel K. Gibson ACSPRI Centre for Social Research (ACSR) Research School of Social Science The Australian National University Australia Prof. Ian McAllister Research School of Social Sciences The Australian National University Australia - Belgium (2003) Prof. Jaak Billiet University of Leuven Belgium Prof. Lieven De Winter University of Louvain La Neuve Belgium Prof. Andre-Paul Frognier University of Louvain La Neuve Belgium Prof. Marc Swyngedouw University of Leuven Belgium - Brazil (2002) Alberto Carlos Melo de Almeida UFF-Universidade Federal Fluminense and FGV-Fundaçăo Getúlio Vargas Brasil Rachel Meneguello Unicamp - Cesop Cidade Universitária "Zeferino Vaz" Brasil - Bulgaria (2001) Radosveta Popova TNS-BBSS Gallup International Bulgaria - Canada (2004) André Blais Département de science politique Université de Montréal Canada Joanna Everitt University of New Brunswick - Saint John Department of History and Politics Canada Patrick Fournier Département de Science Politique Université de Montréal Canada Elisabeth Gidengil Department of Political Science McGill University Canada Neil Nevitte Department of Political Science University of Toronto Canada - Chile (2005) Professor Marta Lagos Latinobarómetro, Opinión Pública Latinoamericana Chile - Czech Republic (2002) Lukas Linek Institute of Sociology Czech Academy of Sciences Czech Republic Zdenka Mansfeldova Institute of Sociology Czech Academy of Sciences Czech Republic Adela Seidlova CVVM Czech Republic - Denmark (2001) Jřrgen Goul Andersen Aalborg Universitet Denmark Jakob Rathlev Aalborg Universitet Denmark - Finland (2003) Heikki Paloheimo Department of Political Science University of Tampere Finland Juhani Pehkonen TNS Gallup Finland - France (2002) Thomas Gschwend Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES) Universität Mannheim Germany Hermann Schmitt Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES) Universität Mannheim Germany - Germany (2002 Telephone) Hermann Schmitt Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES) Universität Mannheim Germany Bernhard Weßels Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) Germany - Germany (2002 Mail-Back) Hermann Schmitt Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES) Universität Mannheim Germany Bernhard Weßels Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) Germany - Great Britain (2005) John Curtice Department of Government University of Strathclyde Scotland Steve Fisher Trinity College and Department of Sociology, Oxford United Kingdom - Hong Kong (2004) LI Pang-kwong Public Governance Programme and Department of Politics and Sociology Lingnan University Hong Kong - Hungary (2002) Gábor Tóka Political Science Department Central European University Hungary - Iceland (2003) Ólafur Th. Hardarson University of Iceland Iceland - Ireland (2002) Michael Marsh Department of Political Science Trinity College Dublin Ireland - Israel (2003) Asher Arian Political Science, University of Haifa Israel Michal Shamir Political Science, Tel-Aviv University Israel - Italy (2006) Hans Schadee Dipartimento id Psicologia Ateneo Universitŕ delgi Study di Milano - Bicocca Italy Paolo Segatti Dipartimento di Studi Politici e Sociali Universitŕ di Milano Italy - Japan (2004) Hiroshi Hirano Gakushuin University Japan Ken'ichi Ikeda The University of Tokyo Japan Yoshiaki Kobayashi Keio University Japan - Kyrgyzstan (2005) Kusein Isaev Center for Sociological, Politological, Social-Psychological Research Bishkek Humanities University Kyrgyzstan - Mexico (2003) Ulises Beltrán Ugarte CIDE and BGC México Benito Nacif CIDE México Rolando Ocampo Alcantar México Olivia Pérez México - The Netherlands (2002) Galen A. Irwin Leiden University Department of Political Science The Netherlands Joop J.M. van Holsteyn Leiden University Department of Political Science The Netherlands - New Zealand (2002) Jack Vowles The Department of Political Studies University of Auckland New Zealand - Norway (2001) Bernt Aardal Institute for Social Research Norway Henry Valen Institute for Social Research Norway - Peru (2006) Catalina Romero Social Sciences Department Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú Perú David Sulmont Social Sciences Department Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú Perú - Philippines (2004) Linda Luz B. Guerrero Social Weather Stations Philippines Vladymir Joseph Licudine Social Weather Stations Philippines Gerardo Sandoval Social Weather Stations Philippines - Poland (2001) Krzysztof Jasiewicz Department of Sociology, Washington and Lee University and Institute of Political Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences United States/Poland Radoslaw Markowski Institute of Political Studies Polish Academy of Sciences Poland - Portugal (2002) Antonio Barreto ICS-UL, Instituto de Cięncias Sociais Universidade de Lisboa Portugal Andre Freire ISCTE, Higher Institute for Labour and Business Studies and ICS-UL, Social Sciences Research Institute University of Lisbon Portugal - Portugal (2005) António Barreto Instituto de Cięncias Sociais Portugal André Freire Instituto Superior de Cięncias do Trabalho e de Empresa/ Instituto de Cięncias Sociais Universidade de Lisboa Portugal Marina Costa Lobo Instituto de Cięncias Sociais Portugal Peter Magalhăes Instituto de Cięncias Sociais/ Universidade Católica Portuguesa Portugal - Romania (2004) Gabriel Badescu The Center for the Study of Democracy Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj Romania Andrei Gheorghita The Center for the Study of Democracy Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj Romania Paul Sum Department of Political Science and Public Administration University of North Dakota United States - Russia (2004) Timothy Colton Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies Harvard University United States Henry Hale Department of Political Science George Washington University United States Polina Kozyreva JSC "Demoscope" Russia Michael McFaul Hoover Institution Stanford University United States - Slovenia (2004) Janez Stebe Arhiv druzboslovnih podatkov (ADP) Faculty of Social Science - University of Ljubljana Slovenia Niko Tos Faculty of Social Science - University of Ljubljana Slovenia - South Korea (2004) Hyung Joon Kim Korean Social Science Data Center Korea Wook Kim Department of Political Science Paichai University Korea Nam Young Lee Department of Political Science Sookmyung Women's University Korea - Spain (2004) Juan Díez Nicolás ASEP / Complutense University Spain - Sweden (2002) Sören Holmberg Statsvetenskapliga Institutionen Department of Political Science Göteborg University Sweden Henrik Oscarsson Statsvetenskapliga Institutionen Department of Political Science Göteborg University Sweden - Switzerland (2003) Peter Selb Institut für Politikwissenschaft Universität Zürich Switzerland - Taiwan (2001) Chi HUANG Department of Political Science National Chung-Cheng University Taiwan - Taiwan (2004) Chi HUANG Department of Political Science National Chung-Cheng University Taiwan - United States (2004) American National Election Studies (ANES) Center for Political Studies Institute for Social Research University of Michigan United States Nancy Burns Center for Political Studies Institute for Social Research University of Michigan United States Russell Dalton Department of Political Science University of California, Irvine United States Donald R. Kinder Center for Political Studies Institute for Social Research University of Michigan United States W. Phillips Shively Department of Political Science University of Minnesota United States --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 2 SECRETARIAT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- While the CSES project and its governance are international in nature, the CSES Secretariat for CSES Module 2 was housed in the Center for Political Studies, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, United States. Primary support for the CSES Secretariat was provided by the American National Science Foundation (NSF) through two grants, with supplemental funding from the University of Michigan: 1. Grant SES-0112029, "Political Science Research Infrastructure: Comparative Study of Electoral Systems" with Principal Investigators W. Phillips Shively (University of Michigan) and Nancy Burns (University of Michigan) supported the CSES Secretariat for the period 2002 through 2005. 2. Grant SES-0451598, "The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems" with Principal Investigators Nancy Burns (University of Michigan), Donald Kinder (University of Michigan), and Ian McAllister (Australian National University) provided support for the CSES Secretariat for the period 2005 through the release of this dataset, and partial support thereafter. Professor W. Phillips Shively of the University of Minnesota, and chair of the CSES Module 2 Planning Committee, oversaw operations of the CSES Secretariat through 2003. Professor Ian McAllister of the Australian National University, and chair of the CSES Module 3 Planning Committee, oversaw operations through the remainder of CSES Module 2. Various persons staffed the CSES Secretariat throughout the Module 2 period. Ashley Grosse was the Director of Studies during the design phase. David Howell served as the Director of Studies beginning in December 2001. Bojan Todosijevic, Angela Pok, Matias Bargsted, Karen Long Jusko, and Michio Umeda provided research support and data management services. Laurie Winslow, Carol Kent, and Tom Ivacko served as project administrator. Laurie Pierson acted as webmaster, Patricia Luevano provided technical support, and Kelly Ogden-Schuette acted as a research assistant. Sarah Cookingham, Jennifer Dolfus, Daniel Grossman, and Justin Wilson were student employees who provided research, technical, and clerical support. And, while he is not a member of the CSES Secretariat, we would like to thank James Wagner of Survey Research Operations (SRO) at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, for volunteering some of his time to help us think through issues related to the weights. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> MICRO-LEVEL (SURVEY) COMPONENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CSES module is intended to be administered as a single, uninterrupted block of questions at the beginning or the end of a national election survey. There are several features of this component of which analysts should be aware: A. The question text is included in the variable documentation of this codebook. The questions are reported in the order in which they appear in the CSES questionnaire. B. Where there are known differences in the way a particular question was administered in an election study, this is noted in the "Election Study Notes" following the documentation of the corresponding variable. C. There are several sets of party and leader evaluation items included in the module. These correspond to parties labeled A-F, in descending order of vote share, of the six most popular parties in the lower house elections (or presidential elections if legislative elections were not held). Where respondents were asked to evaluate other parties, these evaluations have been included where possible and are labeled parties G-I, regardless of their vote shares. The parties and leaders to which these evaluations apply are identified in Appendix I. D. There are several questions (including the vote-choice and party identification items) which ask the respondents to specify a political party. The codes for these items are also reported in Appendix I. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES MODULE 2 COLLABORATOR INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE CSES QUESTIONNAIRE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following instructions appeared in the header to the questionnaire for CSES Module 2, as instructions to collaborators regarding the implementation of the questionnaire. INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ADMINSTRATION OF THE CSES QUESIONNAIRE: (1) The CSES module is intended to be administered in its entirety as a single, uninterrupted block of questions. In most cases, the CSES module is included as part of a larger study. For reliable comparisons to be made, it is important that any additional items investigators may wish to include do not interrupt the CSES module. (2) The CSES module should be administered as a post-election interview. (3) Where the CSES module is included in a larger study, and to ensure that question-ordering effects are minimized, the CSES module should be administered at the beginning of the survey instrument. Where this is not possible, collaborators should be sensitive to the effects questions asked immediately prior to the module may have. (4) NOTES often precede the question TEXT, and provide instructions for the administration of the item. Where no question TEXT is provided, collaborators should provide documentation of the question used. (5) The response options that should be read to the respondent are contained in the body of the question. (6) Where words appear in brackets [ ] collaborators shall select the words that are most appropriate for use in their polity. Phrases that appear in parentheses ( ) contain words that are optional -- that collaborators (or their interviewers) can decide to read or not read to respondents as needed. (7) Several of the items in the CSES Module follow skip patterns that are noted by braces < >. When a question is inappropriate for a particular respondent because of the skip pattern, code the response 'MISSING'. (8) Respondents who volunteer the response "Don't know" (or who refuse to answer a question) should be coded appropriately. Interviewers should accept a this response and should not probe for additional information or force a respondent to use one of the response categories provided in the text of the question. (9) Showcards may be helpful for the administration of some of the questions. The CSES Secretariat has prepared some, and made them available on its web site. The questions to which these apply are noted below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISTRICT-LEVEL COMPONENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The district-level variables report the returns of the lower house (first segment) election for each respondent's district. Wherever possible, these data have been collected from official electoral commissions (see Bibliography for details). In other cases, CSES has been grateful for the compilations of these data provided by projects like "Political Transformation and the Electoral Process in Post-Communist Europe" project election database (www.essex.ac.uk/elections/). The following district-level data are included in the CSES data file (Xs beneath the first four columns indicate inclusion; if no district data are included, the last column is marked with an X): Seats Candidates/ Vote Turnout No District Lists Returns Data Albania (2005) X Australia (2004) X X X X Belgium (2003) X Brazil (2002) X X X X Bulgaria (2001) X Canada (2004) X X X X Chile (2005) X X X Czech Republic (2002) X Denmark (2001) X Finland (2003) X X X X France (2002) [NA- Presidential Election] Germany (2002) X X X X Great Britain (2005) X X X X Hong Kong (2004) X X X X Hungary (2002) X Iceland (2003) X X X X Ireland (2002) X X X X Israel (2003) X X X X Italy (2006) X X X X Japan (2004) X X X Kyrgyzstan (2005) X Mexico (2003) X X X Netherlands (2002) X X X X New Zealand (2002) X X X X Norway (2001) X X X Peru (2006) X X X X Philippines (2004) X X Poland (2001) X X X X Portugal (2002) X X X X Portugal (2005) X X X X Romania (2004) X X X X Russia (2004) X Slovenia (2004) X X X X South Korea (2004) X Spain (2004) X X X X Sweden (2002) X Switzerland (2003) X X X X Taiwan (2001) X Taiwan (2004) X X United States (2004) X X X --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> MACRO-LEVEL COMPONENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To supplement the micro (survey) data, the teams of researchers responsible for the collection of the public opinion data also compiled and deposited the following types of data: electoral legislation, political party platforms, and official electoral returns. To facilitate this process, a detailed questionnaire was constructed to serve as a framework for the macro component of the project. The Macro Data Reports, completed by the CSES collaborators, can be found on the CSES website in the Module 2 section under "Download Data". Additional measures thought pertinent to the micro-district-macro design are also compiled and available in the CSES data files. A bibliography of the sources consulted during the compilation of macro data follows the main body of these introductory materials. =========================================================================== ))) HOW TO USE THE CSES MODULE 2 DOCUMENTATION =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> TYPES OF DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are several components to the CSES documentation. Analysts will want to become familiar with all of them. For most election studies, collaborators have provided documentation to accompany their election studies, including the source macro reports, design reports, and original-language questionnaire(s). These documents, where available, can be found on the CSES website (www.cses.org) by visiting the "Data Center" and then clicking on the CSES Module 2 download page. The CSES Module 2 questionnaire is also available from the website or by referencing the corresponding variables in this codebook. The codebook consists of three files: "cses2_codebook_part1_introduction.txt" is the codebook introduction, the file you are reading now; it includes an overview of the study and data, information about use of the files, general election study descriptions and notes, and a bibliography "cses2_codebook_part2_variables.txt" is the variable descriptions' file, including questions, code frames, general notes, and notes specific to an election study (by variable) "cses2_codebook_part3_appendices.txt" contains Appendix I (Parties and Leaders) and Appendix II (Primary Electoral Districts). Analysts will also want to become familiar with the CSES Module 2 errata page, which is accessible from the CSES Module 2 download page on the website. Updates, error notifications and corrections are posted there, often in real time, as they become available. Please check the errata page regularly for new notifications. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CODEBOOK CONVENTIONS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the CSES Module 2 dataset, all variables begin with the letter "B". This convention helps reduce the possibility of overwriting data when merging with other CSES data sets. Variables are presented in five groupings: B1001-B1999 Identification, weight, and election study variables B2001-B2999 Demographic variables B3001-B3999 Micro-level (survey) data (the CSES Module 2 questionnaire) B4001-B4999 District-level data B5001-B5999 Macro-level data In the Variable Descriptions portion of the codebook, the headers for individual variables are surrounded by two lines of dashes. Variable names do not exceed eight characters in length. Most sections of the codebook can be navigated in the electronic files by searching for the characters ">>>" or ")))" as appropriate. =========================================================================== ))) HOW TO USE THE CSES MODULE 2 DATA FILES =========================================================================== We recommend that PC users create the following directory on their hard drive, and to download their files from this Module 2 release to that location: c:/cses/module2/20151215/ The subdirectory value "20151215" represents the version (release date) of the dataset - this being the 2015, December 15th version of CSES Module 2. This organization method allows users with multiple CSES datasets and/or versions to stay organized and not over-write their other files. Users of other computer types (Macs, Unix, etc.) are recommended to use a similar directory structure to organize their CSES files. The following ZIP files are available to download from the Module 2 download page under the Data Center on the CSES website. All users should download the codebook file: cses2_codebook.zip Contains the three codebook files, including this one, in text format. Users should also download one or more of the following six files, depending on which statistical package(s) they intend to use with the data, and how: cses2_csv.zip Contains a CSV file with variables names as column headers but no additional metadata (for instance, no code labels are included). cses2_syntax.zip Contains a raw data file and syntax statements to read the dataset into SAS, SPSS, and STATA. The instructions for doing so are found in the headers of the syntax files for each statistical package: cses2.sas for SAS, cses2.sps for SPSS, and cses2.do for STATA. This ZIP file also contains optional missing data statements which can be applied to the dataset in SAS, SPSS, or STATA. cses2_r.zip Contains a R Workplace system file (.rdata), with the dataset already prepared and ready to be loaded into R. Missing data statements are not applied. cses2_sas.zip Contains a SAS 7-8 system file (.sas7bdat), with the dataset already prepared and ready to be loaded into SAS. Missing data statements are not applied. cses2_spss.zip Contains a SPSS system file (.sav), with the dataset already prepared and ready to be loaded into SPSS. Missing data statements are not applied. cses2_stata.zip Contains a STATA 13 system file (.dta), with the dataset already prepared and ready to be loaded into STATA. Missing data statements are not applied. =========================================================================== ))) SPECIAL DATA NOTES =========================================================================== This section provides information about the composition of identification variables, the standard rules and exceptions for coding missing data, and the composition of weights. In addition to the documentation included in this section, please reference specific variable notes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> IDENTIFICATION VARIABLES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Each record in CSES Module 2 contains a number of identification variables with which the analysis will wish to become familiar. These three variables identify the dataset, version, and DOI: B1001 >>> DATASET B1002 >>> DATASET VERSION B1002_DOI>>> DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER This variable uniquely identifies an election study across time. It appears in two variations: B1003 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (NUMERIC POLITY) B1004 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (ALPHABETIC POLITY) This variable uniquely identifies a respondent across time: B1005 >>> ID VARIABLE - RESPONDENT This variable uniquely identifies a polity (country, nation, etc.). It appears in three variations: B1006 >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY CSES CODE B1006_UN >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY UN CODE B1006_NAM>>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY NAME Notes on their creation and use of these variables are available in the Variable Descriptions portion of the codebook. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> MISSING DATA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Researchers should be aware that sometimes there are multiple response categories included in the code "missing" (the code "missing" is usually indicated with a last digit of 9). For some election studies in which we could not distinguish among various answers, the code "missing" may include cases where respondents refused to answer the question, "don't know" responses, and cases where there a particular question went unanswered for other reasons. (2) While CSES guidelines request that the response categories "Refused" and "Don't Know" be volunteered responses, this was not always consistently applied. For instance, sometimes the options were offered explicitly to respondents in mail-back surveys, which do not have the benefit of an interviewer being present. To identify whether the response options were volunteered (or not) in a particular election study, please refer to the original questionnaire provided by the collaborator. The original questionnaires, where available, are accessible from the CSES Module 2 download page under "Data Center" on the CSES website. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WEIGHTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because of the variance in the sample designs used in the election studies included in this project, the weights provided by the collaborators also vary greatly. They are described in detail in variables B1010-B1014. Analysts are advised to read the weight documentation carefully to ensure that their analyses are weighted appropriately. The original weights provided by the collaborators, where available, are: B1010_1 >>> ORIGINAL WEIGHT: SAMPLE B1010_2 >>> ORIGINAL WEIGHT: DEMOGRAPHIC B1010_3 >>> ORIGINAL WEIGHT: POLITICAL The remainder of the weight variables in the dataset are derivative variables, constructed from the original weights: B1011_1 >>> FACTOR: MEAN OF SAMPLE WEIGHT B1011_2 >>> FACTOR: MEAN OF DEMOGRAPHIC WEIGHT B1011_3 >>> FACTOR: MEAN OF POLITICAL WEIGHT B1012_1 >>> POLITY WEIGHT: SAMPLE B1012_2 >>> POLITY WEIGHT: DEMOGRAPHIC B1012_3 >>> POLITY WEIGHT: POLITICAL B1013 >>> FACTOR: SAMPLE SIZE ADJUSTMENT B1014_1 >>> DATASET WEIGHT: SAMPLE B1014_2 >>> DATASET WEIGHT: DEMOGRAPHIC B1014_3 >>> DATASET WEIGHT: POLITICAL --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> FREEDOM STATUS OF ELECTIONS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The majority of studies that comprise CSES are collected in countries that have free or partly free elections. However, sometimes a collaborator will include the CSES module in a study of a country that is a developing democracy or that is considered not free. If the data collection is judged to be of sufficiently high quality, the study is included in CSES datasets even if the country is considered to be not free. The decision is left to individual users as to whether such countries should be included in their analyses of CSES datasets. The CSES Module 2 dataset does not include freedom ratings. Freedom ratings can be obtained from external sources, such as Freedom House, whose website as of this dataset release is: http://www.freedomhouse.org/ Freedom House is not affiliated with the CSES project. =========================================================================== ))) CSES MODULE 2 ELECTION STUDIES =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> LIST OF ELECTION STUDIES INCLUDED IN CSES MODULE 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Full Release of CSES Module 2 contains data from the following forty-one (41) election studies (in alphabetic order): Election Study Cases Albania (2005) 1,116 Australia (2004) 1,769 Belgium (2003) 2,225 Brazil (2002) 2,514 Bulgaria (2001) 1,482 Canada (2004) 1,674 Chile (2005) 1,200 Czech Republic (2002) 948 Denmark (2001) 2,026 Finland (2003) 1,196 France (2002) 1,000 Germany (2002 Mail-Back) 1,023 Germany (2002 Telephone) 2,000 Great Britain (2005) 860 Hong Kong (2004) 582 Hungary (2002) 1,200 Iceland (2003) 1,446 Ireland (2002) 2,367 Israel (2003) 1,212 Italy (2006) 1,439 Japan (2004) 1,977 Kyrgyzstan (2005) 2,000 Mexico (2003) 1,991 Netherlands (2002) 1,574 New Zealand (2002) 1,741 Norway (2001) 2,052 Peru (2006) 2,032 Philippines (2004) 1,200 Poland (2001) 1,794 Portugal (2002) 1,303 Portugal (2005) 2,801 Romania (2004) 1,913 Russia (2004) 1,496 Slovenia (2004) 1,002 South Korea (2004) 1,500 Spain (2004) 1,212 Sweden (2002) 1,060 Switzerland (2003) 1,418 Taiwan (2001) 2,022 Taiwan (2004) 1,823 United States (2004) 1,066 TOTAL 64,256 For multi-wave panel studies, only those respondents who participated in the wave of the study that included CSES Module 2 are included in the CSES Module 2 dataset. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> OTHER ELECTION STUDIES INCLUDING CSES MODULE 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following studies collected CSES data during the CSES Module 2 field period, but were unable to be included in the CSES Module 2 Full Release for the listed reasons. We are highlighting the studies here to promote their efforts, and as a service to CSES users who might wish to contact the collaborators directly to inquire about obtaining the data for use in their own analyses. If you are interested in obtaining these data, please contact the listed collaborators directly. CSES is unable to distribute or support the files. - Belarus (2006) CSES Module 2 was included in a study after the 2006 election in Belarus, under the direction of Principal Investigator Stephen White (University of Glasgow). Fieldwork was carried out by the Center for Sociological and Political Research at Belarusian State University, and produced 1,000 interviews. While a number of CSES Module 2 questions were present in the study, not enough CSES Module 2 questions were present to allow for its inclusion in the CSES Module 2 Full Release. - Great Britain (2005 Internet Study) The British Election Study (BES), under the direction of Principal Investigators David Sanders (University of Essex), Paul Whiteley (University of Essex), Harold Clarke (University of Texas at Dallas), and Marianne Stewart (University of Texas at Dallas), included CSES Module 2 in a Internet survey run by YouGov after the 2005 election in Great Britain. A total of 3,326 interviews were collected. As of publication time, the dataset was publicly available from the BES website at address: http://www.essex.ac.uk/bes/2005/CSES_Page.htm The study has also been archived at the UK data archive at the University of Essex (http://www.data-archive.ac.uk/) as Study Number 5495, "British Election Study, 2005: Comparative Study of Electoral Systems". The BES survey that included CSES Module 2 drew respondents from a panel built using a non-probability sample, not a probability sample, and thus the study was unable to be included in the CSES Module 2 Full Release. It did appear previously, however, in the fourth advance release of CSES Module 2 (April 10, 2006 version). It is worth noting that John Curtice and Steve Fisher arranged for CSES Module 2 to be included as a self-completion supplement to the 2005 British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey. The BSA data appear in the CSES Module 2 Full Release, and having being collected after the same election, may be interesting to methodologists for mode comparisons with the BES Internet effort. - Thailand (2001) CSES Module 1 was repeated in Thailand after their 2001 election, as part of a face-to-face data collection that resulted in 2,000 interviews under the direction of Principal Investigators Thawilwadee Bureekul (The King Prajadhipok's Institute) and Robert Albritton (The University of Mississippi). While some questions are in common, not enough CSES Module 2 questions were present in Module 1 to allow for inclusion of the study in the CSES Module 2 Full Release. - Ukraine (2006) CSES Module 2 was included in a study after the 2006 election in Ukraine, under the direction of Principal Investigator Stephen White (University of Glasgow). Fieldwork was carried out by the Ukrainian partners of Russian Research, and produced 1,600 interviews. While a number of CSES Module 2 questions were present in the study, not enough CSES Module 2 questions were present to allow for its inclusion in the CSES Module 2 Full Release. =========================================================================== ))) ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES =========================================================================== The following section provides: (1) General information about the election after which the CSES Module 2 was administered. In several cases, the election followed the establishment of new electoral rules. In several others, the election marks a dramatic change in government. This information is provided with the intention of alerting the analyst to interesting features of the election. For more details, please refer to the Macro Reports prepared by the collaborators, available on the CSES website. Unless specified, the information in this section has been provided by the collaborator, the Macro Report, or the Parline database (with permission). (2) General information about the research and sample designs of the component election studies. For example, in some cases, the CSES module was administered in a later wave of a multi-wave study. Additionally, in several countries, portions of the population were excluded from the sample frame, usually because of geographic isolation. (3) Additional information on survey weights, where available, is provided for some election studies. Please note that the number of "Election Summaries" will not match the number of election studies, because sometimes multiple election studies are conducted concerning a single election. Where multiple election studies are conducted concerning a single election, they are grouped under a single header. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ALBANIA (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The elections were considered a crucial step towards Albania's accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU). The EU insisted that free and fair elections would be a condition for the conclusion of a Stabilization and Association Agreement, paving the way to EU membership. Both parties that have dominated Albanian politics since the collapse of Communism in 1991, the PSS, led by Prime Minister Fatos Nano, and the PDA of former President Sali Berisha, supported joining the two organizations. They also called for strong ties with the United States and supported Albanian troop deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Bosnia. But the parties proposed different policies over tax reform. The PDA insisted on cutting taxes in half in order to promote investment, which the PSS criticized as being irrational. Continuing problems of corruption in the country were also an important issue in the elections, and the PSS was criticized for not handling the problem efficiently. The elections were monitored by 3,500 local observers together with a total of 400 international observers. Less election-related violence was reported than in previous elections. However, an election official was shot dead in the capital Tirana on voting day, while another man was shot dead outside the PDA's office. The man allegedly involved in this killing was later killed in a reprisal shooting. The OSCE said the conduct of the poll showed only limited progress since previous elections, criticizing incorrect procedures related to the use of ink to prevent multiple voting, the secrecy of the vote and verification of voters' identities. A delegation from the European Parliament stated that voter lists were "intentionally inaccurate", which thus disillusioned voters. Following complaints filed with the Central Elections Commission (CEC), re-runs were held in three single-member constituencies on 21 August. Following the allocation of the proportional representation seats, the PDA and its allies secured an absolute majority of 73 seats, while the PSS and its allies totaled 64 seats. (Source: PARLINE database: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parline.htm) (2) The 2005 Albanian post-election survey was administered through face-to-face interviews to a representative sample of 1,500 households and was conducted between July 5th and 20th, 2005. A stratified sample selection model was employed whereby the country was divided into two parts: i) the six main districts counting for 48 percent of the total population of Albania, and ii) the rest of the country. In the six main districts, seven to ten households were interviewed in each Primary Sample Unit (PSU) selected for every 9,200 households sorted geographically from North to South (7 or 10 interviews x 83 PSUs for every 9,200 households). In the rest of the country, seven to ten households were interviewed in each PSU (90) selected for every 7,520 households. The second household member over 18 years old to appear to the interviewer was selected as a respondent. The response rate was 76%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The election campaign was a tight contest between the Australian Labor Party (led by Mark Latham, who had been elected its leader in December 2003) and the conservative Coalition of the Liberal Party and the National Party (led by Prime Minister John Howard). During the election campaign, Howard concentrated on the two main issues of his bid for re-election - economic prosperity (including the lowest interest rates in a generation) and a steady hand in matters of national security. Labor's campaign was centered on issues such as creating a more equitable education system and making health care more affordable. The bombing of the Australian Embassy in Jakarta the month prior to the elections made national security a key issue in the campaign. The two candidates had very different positions on the country's role in the war on terror. Prime Minister John Howard had sent the third largest combat force in the United States-led intervention in Iraq, while Latham said the deployment had made the country less safe and promised that as Prime Minister he would withdraw most of Australia's troops from Iraq by the end of the year. The elections saw the Coalition increase its majority in the House of Representatives with the Liberal Party obtaining 75 seats and its coalition partner, the National Party, obtaining 12 seats. The Australian Labor Party won 60 seats. Additionally, three independents were elected. (2) The 2004 Australian Election Study is the seventh in a series of surveys, beginning in 1987, that have been timed to coincide with Australian Federal elections. Data collection, using self-completion (mail out/mail back) questionnaires, was administered between October 8, 2005 and February 15 2005. The survey is based on a stratified systematic random sample. The sample of electors for all of Australia was drawn from the Commonwealth Electoral Roll by the Australian Electoral Commission following the close of rolls for the 2004 election. The Commission supplied name and address information only, to be used solely for this study. The sample was selected to be proportional to the population on a state by state basis. Of a total mailing of 4,250, there were 1,769 completed returns, giving a raw response rate of 42%. An adjusted response rate of 45% was calculated by removing the out-of-scope sample (e.g., deceased, incapable, return to sender, n=275). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BELGIUM (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) In the May 2003 elections, Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt's centre-left coalition of six parties was primarily opposed by the Christian Social Parties and far-right parties (Vlaams Blok and National Front). Ten days before polling day, the French-speaking Green Party quit the coalition over a conflict about overnight flights over Brussels. The electoral campaign mainly focused on economic issues such as tax cuts. With economic growth sluggish and unemployment high, Verhofstadt vowed to keep cutting taxes and to reform state bureaucracy and an overburdened judiciary. During the four years in government, the coalition had passed some of the world's most progressive social legislation, including legalizing gay marriage and euthanasia. The Flemish far-right Vlaams Blok, desiring Flemish independence, campaigned for zero tolerance on crime and for ending immigration. It expected to improve its score in Antwerp, the country's second city, where immigrants clashed with police in November 2002. The Liberal Party and the Socialist Party registered gains in both parts of the linguistically divided country. The Socialists made the biggest gains, both in terms of seats and votes. The Christian-Socialists recorded a slight decline, losing 3 seats. The Vlaams Blok won the largest vote in its 25-year history winning 3 extra seats, taking its tally to 18 seats. In the French-speaking southern region of Wallonia, the extreme-right National Front scored 5.2 percent despite an almost invisible campaign boycotted by public broadcasters. Support for the Greens, who had been members of the outgoing coalition, collapsed, as they lost all nine seats in Flanders and seven out of 11 in Wallonia. (2) Face-to-face interviewing started on December 15, 2003, seven months following the parliamentary elections. Interviewing concluded April 30, 2004. The survey was conducted in both Dutch and French. The sampling frame excluded the German speaking region (population size approximately 72,000). A two stage sampling procedure was used. Primary units were stratified by province, municipalities, selected according to their population size. Secondary (or elementary) units were selected at random within the primary units. Individual respondents were selected at random from the national registry. Interviewers made four attempts to contact each one of the respondents. The response rate was 63.4%. (3) The CSES data file includes two weight variables. The first weight variable is designed to match the known demographic distribution of the population by region, age, gender, and education (the original variable ‘AGE_Belg’). The calculation method used includes information on population subclasses and is based on the joint distribution of age (A), gender (G), and education (E) in the official statistics (NIS data, 2003). The seven age categories are 18-24; 25-34; 35-44; 45-54; 55-64; 65-74 and plus 74. The five education categories are ‘No Education or Primary Education’; ‘Lower Secondary Education’; ‘Higher Secondary Education’; ‘Higher Education’ and ‘University’. The weighting variable for Belgium was computed to ensure correct distribution between the regions (Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels). This variable is included as a demographic weight. The political weight contains weighting coefficients for joint distribution of region, age, gender, education, and vote in the 2003 General Elections for the Belgian sample. Since the sample was drawn in such a way that every person had the same chance of being elected, there is no need to compensate for differential probability of selection; hence, there is no sample weight. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BRAZIL (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) On October 6, 2002, Brazilians went to the polls to elect a new President, along with all 513 members of the House of Deputies, two-thirds of the 81 members of the Senate, and the state governors. This was the first time in the country that the some 115 million registered voters across the country could use a computerized voting system in a presidential election, allowing at least 70 percent of the vote to be counted four hours after the ballots close and the final results to be released the following day. The elections were held against a background of great uncertainty in the economic field and, above all, in financial markets. Another issue raised during the electoral campaign was violence, a topic which took on renewed importance after authorities in Rio de Janeiro warned that criminal gangs had threatened to disrupt the voting. Federal troops were sent to the city in an effort to ensure safe voting after the electoral commission had authorized the Defense Ministry to send reinforcements. The presidential candidate leading the opinion polls was Luis Inacio da Silva, also known as "Lula", the leader of the leftist Workers Party. The former metal- worker had made unemployment his top campaign issue and promised to revive the economy. About a quarter of Brazil's population live below the poverty line and the country has the world's fourth worst income distribution. In the presidential elections, none of the candidates won an outright majority. Lula da Silva, who topped the poll, and Serra therefore faced a second round on October 27, 2002. Lula da Silva won the second round with 60 percent of the votes. The left and centre-left candidates also performed well in the elections for Congress and state governorships. "The October 2002 elections were a milestone in Brazilian electoral history. For the first time, a left party, the Workers Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores, PT), won both the presidential election and a plurality of seats in the Chamber of Deputies." (Source: Nicolau, 2004, p. 338). (2) The CSES survey was conducted between October 31 - December 28, 2002, after the multiple elections held on October 6 and 27. The primary focus of the CSES study was the parliamentary election for the Lower House. The survey used face-to-face interviews, on a random sample of 2514 respondents, with a 72% response rate. To reduce costs of travel, all municipios with less than 20,000 inhabitants were excluded. Also excluded was 70 percent of rural households. Thus, 11.4 percent of the municipios and 3 percent of the population were excluded from the sample. The total percentage of the eligible population excluded from the sample frame was about 4%. In the first stage of the sampling, 102 primary sampling units (PSU), or municipios, were selected with probability proportional to size (PPS). Each PSU consists of a single municipio as defined by IBGE (institute that conducts census in Brazil). For the 1996 Contagem, IBGE divided Brazil into 5 census regions with 27 states and 5507 municipios. Twenty seven of these municipios were selected with certainty as self-representing PSUs and 75 as non self- representing PSUs. The self-representing PSUs are state capitals. In the second stage, 280 secondary units (census tracts) were selected PPS within each of the PSUs. In the third stage, households were selected PPS within census tracts with one adult respondent being selected at random. The person who had the date of anniversary closest to the date of reference (October 27) was then selected to answer the questionnaire. The survey used two versions of the questionnaire with small differences (see the corresponding file in the download section of the CSES web site). (3) One original weight variable was submitted with the Brazilian data file. It compensates for both disproportional sampling in the state of Săo Paulo as well as the demographic profile of the population of the country. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - BULGARIA (2001) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The elections were held on June 17, 2001 according to a proportional system with ballot lists of parties, coalitions, and independent candidates registered in 31 multi-mandate constituencies. Thirty-six parties and coalitions (out of a total of 64), as well as 11 independent candidates, took part in the elections. Four political forces exceeded the 4% barrier. This was the first time since the end of the communist era that Parliament and Government completed their full four-year term. (2) This is a post-election, face-to-face survey, conducted between July 5-15, 2001. The sample was designed to represent the national population of voting age by region, urban/rural residence, gender, age and ethnicity. Double-clustered random sampling was employed, with universe stratification by region (28 regions in sum). As a basis for the sample, the database of ESGRAON was used, which contains the full name and address of each inhabitant. With this information, various other aggregates were later superimposed, such as election precincts, settlements, municipalities, and regions. For the purposes of the sampling design procedure, the following steps were made: 1) universe was stratified by region (28 in total), 2) lists of election precincts in each region were prepared containing the number of persons aged 18+ in each precinct, and 3) given the targeted size of the final sample (1620), the number of individuals to be interviewed in each region was determined directly proportional to the relative share of the respective region within the universe. The final stage relates to the random selection of sampling points used in the survey. The transition from "sampling point" to "persons with addresses" was achieved through systematic stepped selection from the initial list of individuals in each election precinct. The final product of this procedure was a list of 1980 persons with their full three names and precise addresses, that were grouped per sampling point, settlement and region. There were 1,864 realized attempts at interviewing during the fieldwork (94.14%). Effective interviews after quality control procedures resulted in a sample size of 1,482. Three contacts were made with the household before declaring it non-sample or non-interview. Data weights are based on data provided by the National Statistical Institute and adjust for gender, age, ethnicity, and type of residence (capital city vs. city vs. town vs. village). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CANADA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) On May 23, 2004, on the advice of the Prime Minister Paul Martin, the Governor General dissolved Parliament, paving the way for general elections on June 28, 2004. Martin was appointed to the office of Prime Minister in December 2003 following his election as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and the retirement of Jean Chretien, who had served as Prime Minister for ten years. The Prime Minister was trying to take his Liberal Party to its fourth straight general election victory. This party was challenged by the Conservative Party, led by Stephen Harper, the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP) of Jack Layton, and the Bloc Québécois, a separatist party that is strong in Quebec. For the first time since 1993, the country's two strongest conservative parties, the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives, were united to contest the general election, having merged into the new Conservative Party in October 2003. The main issue of the 2004 campaign was the "sponsorship scandal" that involved the disbursement by the government of $250 million in advertising contracts over four years to Quebec advertising firms friendly to the Liberal Party with a significant portion, of the amount, about $100 million, paid as fees and commissions. Both the Conservative Party and the Bloc Quebecois used this scandal against the Liberal Party. Other major issues during the electoral campaign included improvements in the government-administered healthcare system, taxes, gun registration, homelessness, and the issue of same sex marriages. Voter turnout was 60.9 percent, the lowest since 1898. The Liberals won 36.7% of the popular vote. That translated to 135 seats in the House of Commons, a sharp decrease from the number the Liberals had won in three landslide victories since 1993, but far more than the 99 seats won by the Conservative Party. The big winner of the election was the Bloc Québécois, whose win of 54 of Quebec's 75 seats was a considerable improvement over its victory in 38 districts in 2000. The New Democratic Party obtained 19 seats while the last seat went to an independent candidate. (2) The CSES survey was conducted as a part of the three-component Canadian Election study: the Campaign-Period Survey (CPS), the Post-Election Survey (PES), and the Mail-back Survey (MBS)). The CSES survey questions, apart from the current and previous vote choice items, were part of the MBS. Demographic variables are recorded in the CPS. The post-election survey commenced one week after election on July 5 and ran to September 19, 2004. The MBS, started about one week after the start of the PES, and questionnaires returned to Institute for Social Research at York University before the end of November were added to the data file. A rolling cross- section sample release was employed for the CPS. Modified random digit dialing (RDD) procedures were utilized to select households. Within households, the birthday selection method was used to select respondents. The sample for the CPS was designed to represent the adult population of Canada: Canadian citizens 18 years of age or older who speak one of Canada's official languages, English or French, and reside in private homes in the ten Canadian provinces (thus excluding the territories). Because the survey was conducted by telephone, the small proportion of households in Canada without telephones were excluded from the sample population. Residents of old age homes, group homes, and educational and penal institutions were excluded from the sample. Statistics Canada estimates that 3.7% of the private households in Canada do not have a residential telephone number. To select individual survey respondents for the CPS, a two-stage probability selection process was utilized. The first stage involved the selection of households by randomly selecting telephone numbers. The second stage of the sample selection process was the random selection of a respondent from the selected household. To be eligible for the interview the household member had to be an adult (18 years of age or older) and a Canadian citizen. If there was more than one eligible person in the household, the person with the next birthday was selected as the survey respondent. The design of the CES included a longitudinal component as the CPS respondents were asked to complete the PES and respondents to the PES were asked to complete the MBS. There was no substitution of respondents for those who declined to participate in the second or third wave of the study. The number of completed interviews, the sample size, for the three studies was 4,323, 3,138 and 1,674 respectively. The response rate to the CPS was 55 percent and the reinterview rate for the PES was 73 percent and 53 percent of the PES respondents (representing 39 percent of the CPS respondents) completed the MBS. (3) In order to produce national estimates it is advisable to correct for both the unequal probabilities of selection at the household stage and the unequal probabilities of selection based on province of residence. The included sample weight (B1010_1) represents the original National Weight, constructed as the product of the household weight and the provincial weight and should be used with the National Sample when national estimates are required. The household weight compensates for the higher probability of households with smaller number of adults to be included in the sample. The Provincial weight compensates for over representation of the eight smaller provinces and a corresponding under-representation reduction in Ontario and Quebec. The weights are prepared for the entire Canadian Election Study sample, i.e., not separately for the post-election and mail-back data sets. The re-interview rates are reasonably high and sample attrition between the surveys was not associated with household size or province. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CHILE (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) In the wake of the constitutional reforms of August 2005 which abolished the seats reserved for non-elected senators, parliamentary elections were held in parallel with the presidential election on 11 December 2005. The main issues at the 2005 elections were how to deal with crime, unemployment, health, education, and poverty. One of the leading presidential candidates, former PS defense minister, Ms. Michelle Bachelet, vowed to implement greater regional trade integration and a better social security and pension system. Her main rival, billionaire and former senator, Mr. Sebastián Pińera of the RN, pledged to modernize the national police force and introduce tough policies on crime. He distanced himself from his partner in the APC coalition, Mr. Joaquin Lavín, leader of the Independent Democratic Union (UDI). The latter was also a presidential candidate. The UDI promised to create one million new jobs by 2011 and combat poverty and inflation. The CPD fared well in both polls. It obtained the majority in both chambers of parliament for the first time since the return of democracy in 1990, winning 11 of the 20 renewed seats in the Senate. It thereby increased its number of seats to 20 out of 38. In the Chamber of Deputies, it secured 65 of the 120 seats, including two independents allied to it. The number of seats going to the Alliance for Chile (APC) and allied independents was reduced to 54 in the Chamber of Deputies and 17 in the Senate. In the presidential run-offs held on 15 January 2006, the CPD candidate, Ms. Michelle Bachelet, secured 53.5 per cent of the poll, becoming Chile's first woman president. (Source: Parline) (2) The Chile 2005 Election Study was conducted between January 1st and 8th, 2006 as a post-election study using face-to-face interviews. The sample frame included citizens eligible to vote living in urban areas only and excluded two low density regions of the country (Regions XI and XII). Around 20% of the population were excluded from the sample frame. The sample selection was applied in three stages: a) Random selection of subdistritos (geographical units with approximately two thousand inhabitants); b) Random selection of houses in the subdistritos; and c) After the house was selected, the person was randomly selected through the last birthday method. Three contacts were made with the household before declaring it non-interview. (3) The study has one multiplicative weight variable designed to match the distribution of sex and education in the population and the results of the first round of the presidential election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The two main parties involved in the 2002 election were the governing Czech Social Democratic Party (CSSD) and the main opposition, the centre- right Civic Democrat Party (ODS) of the former Prime Minister Vaclav Klaus. During the electoral campaign, both parties focused their programs on accession to the EU and on promises of strong economic performance. The main obstacle politicians had to overcome before the 2002 elections was voter apathy. According to analysts, one of the main reasons for this apathy was the very few new faces contesting the polls. In fact, turnout was only 58 percent, much lower than the 74 percent registered in the 1998 elections. In the election to the Chamber of Deputies, the leftist Czech Social Democratic Party (CSSD) was returned with the largest number of seats for the second consecutive time. The party failed to secure an overall majority, however, winning only 70 of the 200 seats in the Chamber, four less than in the previous 1998 elections. The opposition, the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) won 58 seats, 5 less than the 63 it secured in 1998. The Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM) was the only party to increase its representation, taking 41 seats (17 more than in 1998). The centre-right Coalition, formed by the Christian Democratic Union-Czech People's Party (KDU-CSL) and Freedom Union-Democratic Union (US-DEU), obtained 31 seats, eight fewer than in 1998. (2) The Czech post-election study was conducted between June 24 and July 1, 2002 with face-to-face interviews. The sample was designed as a regular continuous monthly survey of CVVM (Centrum pro vyzkum verejneho mineni - Centre for public opinion polling). Also included are respondents between 15-17 years of age. Yet respondents less than 18 years of age are not included in the CSES sample, as they are not allowed to vote. The study used the quota sampling design. Respondents were interviewed in their homes. The only requirement for inclusion in the sample frame was that a person lives in a house or flat. Homeless people thus were not intentionally excluded. The Quota Sample was designed, using census data about the structure of the population in terms of education, sex, region and age. Quotas were designed for each region (total of 8 regional units). Individual respondents were identified by interviewers, who selected respondents in the county area based on fulfilling the quota. The response rate was 52.8%. Note that respondents who refused to take part in an interview were not asked again or otherwise persuaded; other people were chosen instead. The number of refusals reflects the number of people who refused to be interviewed and were replaced by other respondents. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - DENMARK (2001) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The Danish 2001 elections brought an end to the Danish Social Democratic - Radical Liberal coalition government that was in power since 1993. Voters’ swing to the right was such that, for the first time since 1929, the right obtained a clear majority, so the Liberals and Conservatives were enabled to form a government without support from any of the small centre parties. What is interesting is that the defeat of the governing parties took place "against the background of an economic miracle that had reduced unemployment by more than 60%, a significant increase in private and public consumption, and resolution of the state deficit problem" (Anderson 2003, p. 186). The most decisive issue was not the war against terrorism, or even welfare, but rather, the immigration issue. All parties on the right, not only the two populist parties but also the Liberals and the Conservatives, demanded tighter rules, especially concerning the family reunion and restricting the access to social security. Welfare issues were also seen as salient, but the important change in 2001 was that the social democrats were perceived as less competent than the bourgeois parties. (2) The Danish Election Study used face-to-face interviews conducted between December 7, 2001 and March 14, 2003. The sample is based on a random systematic selection with clusters of households, where the primary sampling units were households. Percentage of the eligible population excluded from the sample frame was 2.6%. Respondents within a household were selected according to the birthday criteria. The response rate was 58.7%. (3) The study does not have weight variable(s). "The data [were] representative, so there was no need for weights. (This was proved by actually making weights, which turned out to make no difference)." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - FINLAND (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) This was the first election held under the new constitution of 2001. The 2003 electoral campaign focused on unemployment, tax cuts, the country's possible entry into NATO, as well as the criticism of the government's stance on Iraq by the opposition Centre Party. The leader of this party, Anneli Jaatteenmaki, accused the four-party ruling coalition of doing too little to push for a peaceful resolution of the Iraq crisis, while Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen declared that Finland wanted a UN-brokered solution. The Prime Minister's Social Democrats narrowly lost the elections to the Centre Party, as the latter gained just two more seats than Lipponen's but not an absolute majority. The Centre Party enjoyed the greatest gain in voter support, obtaining 24.7 per cent of the vote (55 of 200 seats), while the Social Democratic Party won 24.5 per cent with 53 seats. Following government coalition talks between the Centre Party, the Social Democratic Party, and the Swedish People's Party, a new Centre Party-led Cabinet was sworn in on 15 April 2003, with Anneli Jäätteenmäki as the new Prime Minister, making her the first woman Prime Minister in the country's history. (2) Face-to-face interviewing started on March 17, 2003, the day following the parliamentary elections, and ended on April 30, 2003. The survey was conducted in both Finnish and Swedish. The primary sampling units were based on two dimensions. The North-South dimension grouped the municipalities into three groups: South, Central, and Northern Finland. The urban-rural dimension was used to form two groups: 1) urban municipalities and 2) semi-urban and rural municipalities. By linking these two dimensions, six primary level strata were obtained. The Capital Region (Helsinki, Espoo, Vantaa, Kauniainen) formed an individual stratum. The second stage stratification grouped area zip codes within the first stage strata, so that each second stage stratum contained an approximately similar number of people. Inside each stratum, clusters (zip code areas) were picked using PPS-sampling. Inside each picked cluster the same sample size (6 interviews) was used. Inside each sampled cluster (zip code area), a starting point (address) was chosen randomly. Six subsequent interviews were made using random walking from each randomly sampled starting address. From every target household, a person was selected who met the requirements for sex and age criteria. The original sample was N=1270 which included an over-sample (134 cases) of the Swedish speaking Finns. In the final dataset the number of cases is 1196, of which 5% (60 cases) are Swedish speaking Finns. The over-sample was corrected by dropping out randomly 74 Swedish speaking Finns (using SPSS SAMPLE command). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - FRANCE (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Results of the first round of the French 2002 election came as a shock to many observers. The general expectation was to see Jacques Chirac (The Rally for the Republic) and Lionel Jospin (The Socialist Party) in the second round. Due to Jospin's poor showing and the widespread splintering of the left-wing vote in the first round of the election, Jean-Marie Le Pen (Front National) faced Chirac in the second ballot. As a consequence, Jospin, who was also the outgoing Prime Minister, resigned as head of the Socialist Party and did not stand in the subsequent legislative elections. For many voters the choice between Chirac, who was at the time under investigation for actions carried out while he was mayor of Paris and who was benefiting from Presidential immunity and Le Pen, an extreme nationalist, was rather difficult. Although Chirac defeated Le Pen by a landslide, the victory was probably based more on the fear of a victory for an extreme right leader than enthusiastic support for the incumbent. The presidential election of 2002 signified the rise of the right wing in French politics. (2) The CSES survey was conducted on May 23-24, 2002, after the presidential election (April 21 and May 5, 2002) and before the parliamentary elections (June 9 and 16, 2002). This was a telephone survey (CATI system) that included unlisted telephone numbers in the population sampled. It is estimated that approximately 4% of households were without a telephone and, hence, they were excluded from the sample frame. The response rate was 43%. Primary sampling units were randomly selected from national telephone numbers, with selection in further stages according to a quota method, using gender, age, occupation, city size, and region. Five contacts were made with the household before declaring it non-interview. There was a maximum of two re-contacts used to persuade respondents to be interviewed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - GERMANY (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The electoral campaign focused on the disastrous floods that had hit the eastern and northern parts of Germany. Analysts believed that Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's confident handling of the crisis helped the Social Democratic Party (SPD) to recover the Germans' confidence as expressed in the opinion polls. Other major issues in the agenda during the electoral campaign were unemployment and the state of the country's economy. Edmund Stoiber, leader of the Christian Social Union (CSU), presented himself as the man who could reproduce Bavaria's economic success at the national level. The elections were the first in German history to feature televised debates between the two main candidates for the post of Chancellor. Foreign policy also dominated the speeches of the two candidates and, in particular, Germany's relations with the United States. Gerhard Schroeder picked up votes by speaking out against U.S. plans for military action against Iraq. However, he was criticized by conservatives for wrecking the U.S.-German relationship. The final results gave the SPD 251 seats, 16 less than in the outgoing legislature. The CDU increased its representation by ten seats, reaching 190, while its partner, the Christian Social Union of Bavaria (CSU) won 58 seats, 15 more than in 1998. The Green Party took 55 seats, 12 more than in the previous elections. The Free Democratic Party (FDP) obtained 47 seats, while the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) obtained only 2 seats, a net loss of 30. A few weeks after the elections, the two parties in the ruling Red-Green coalition (the SPD and the Green Party) reached an agreement on the new coalition. (2a) Telephone survey This is a post-election survey, focused on the Bundestag elections of September 22, 2002. The interviews were conducted by telephone, between October 21 and November 12, 2002. Some 4% of the eligible population was excluded from the sample frame. Furthermore, the new Laender (East Germany) was over-sampled. The survey includes 1007 respondents from East Germany and 993 from West Germany. The sample can be analyzed separately for East and West, or, if appropriately weighted, for Germany, as a whole. The sample is a single-stage random household sample. An initial sample was drawn from the Infratest Telephone Household Master Sample (ITMS) which comprises a multi-stratified, largely unclustered sample that is distributed in proportion to the number of private households in micro- cells, thereby compensating for regional or local differences in the telephone density of households. The sample frame covers all listed and unlisted numbers in Germany. A second sample for the German post-election study was drawn from a pool of respondents interviewed before the election who agreed to participate in further studies. Respondents were interviewed from mid-August, 2002 up to the election on September 22, 2002. 85.6% of the second sample was willing to provide another interview. The response rate of the first wave of the panel study was 66.3%. (2b) Mail-Back survey This study is part if a Pre-Post Election Panel Study. The survey was applied as a self-completion supplement drop-off to the face-to-face pre-election survey. The interviews were completed between September 23 and October 31, 2002. The primary sampling units were randomly selected, and the individual respondents were identified using the Birthday rule. Total panel attrition was 49 percent. (3) Before the federal election of 22 September 2002, the standard number of seats in the German federal parliament, the Bundestag, was reduced from 656 to 598. To achieve this, the boundaries of the 167 constituencies were redrawn. As a result, there were 299 constituencies in 2002, 29 fewer than in 1998. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) On April 4, 2005, Prime Minister Tony Blair called a general election for 5 May 2005 after asking Queen Elizabeth II to dissolve Parliament. At this election, the statutory number of members was decreased to 646 from 659, due to changes in constituency boundaries in Scotland where there are now 59 constituencies instead of 72. During the campaign, Blair asked voters' support for eight years of economic growth and low unemployment rate. The Conservative leader, Michael Howard, accused the Labour government of broken promises and insisted that his party would focus on the issues that matter to hard-working Britons, promising a Ł4 billion tax cut. He also criticized Labour's immigration and health care policies. The Conservatives also emphasized the crime issue, with the idea to link immigration, terrorism, and crime together in the public mind. The Liberal Democrat leader promised to address people's hopes, not playing on people's fears. He said his party would be the real alternative, promising to replace the council tax with a local income tax and to provide free personal care for the elderly. Blair was criticized by both opposition parties, and also within his own party, over Britain’s role in Iraq. The final results gave Blair a historic third term in office, though the party lost 56 seats compared to the previous election. It also won the lowest share of the vote for a ruling party since the Great Reform Act of 1832: 35.2 percent. The Conservative Party increased its number of seats by 33 to a total of 197 by securing 32.3 percent of the vote, merely 2.9 percentage points less than Labour. The Liberal Democrats won 62 seats, 11 more than in 2000. (Source: PARLINE database: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parline.htm) (2) The CSES module was implemented between June 20 and November 24, 2005, as a self-completion post-electoral supplement to the annual British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey. This self-completion supplement was left behind to a sub-sample of BSA respondents by the interviewer at the end of a face-to- face interview, and picked up later. The sample frame is intended to cover Great Britain (Northern Ireland was excluded and as well as Scotland north of the Caledonian Canal). The exact percentage of the eligible population excluded from the sample frame is not available, given that the sample frame - the Post Address File (PAF, a list of addresses maintained by the Post Office)- includes the people that needed to be excluded for CSES purposes. Nonetheless we know that the proportion of the population excluded is more than 3.1%. Estimates based on the 1991 Census Validation Study suggest that PAF has a 96.4% coverage of households and a 96.9% coverage of individuals. The primary sampling units - postcode sectors- were randomly selected and stratified by region, population density and percent owner-occupiers. Within each selected postcode sector, addresses were drawn using regular intervals and a random start. At selected addresses, the interviewer selected one person to be interviewed. The weight factor corrects for respondents at multi-household addresses and/or in large households which had less chance of selection than respondents at single household addresses and/or in small households. The response rate was 40%. (3) There is one weight variable, which adjusts for a) unequal selection probability of respondents, b) non-response rates and c) demographic features (gender, age and region). The BSA weights were created using the 2004 mid-year population estimates from ONS/GROS. The weight factor was estimated considering the total sample of 4,268 individuals, from which CSES is a random sub-sample (with 860 respondents). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - HONG KONG (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The Hong Kong 2004 Legislative Council Election was held on September 12, 2004, which returned 30 members from the five geographical constituencies and another 30 members from the 28 functional constituencies. This was the first general election held after the March of July 1, 2003, in which about half a million Hong Kong people marched to demand more democracy and protest against the resumption of the second reading of the National Security Bill. The 2004 election was fought between the pan-democrats and the pro-government (the leftists and the conservatives) camps. After its victory in the 2003 District Council Election held on November 23, 2003, the pan-democrats camp had planned but failed to get hold of a majority of seats in the Legislative Council. However, the number of seats that the pan-democrat camp commanded has increased from 21 in 2000 to 25 in 2004. (2) The Hong Kong 2004 Election Study was conducted between October 5 and December 19, 2004, as a post-election study based on face-to-face interviews. The sample frame included citizens eligible to vote (registered electors). A pool of 4,000 household addresses was provided by the Census and Statistics Department (CSD), Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government. According to the CSD, household addresses were selected by systematic replicated sampling from its Register of Quarters. 2,500 household addresses were then randomly selected from the pool by the investigator. Interviewers then visited the selected households to see if there was a registered elector(s). Within the selected household, one respondent was selected randomly among the registered electors by using the Kish Table. The response rate was 39.2%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - HUNGARY (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Outgoing Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who led the center-right Fidesz- MPP party, focused his electoral campaign on the country's strong economic growth as well as on his nationalist agenda, which gives perks to ethnic Hungarians living abroad. One of the most important components of this agenda is "the reunification of the nation across the borders". This nationalism was highly criticized by the opposition Socialists, who contested that it harms Hungary's image abroad. They accused the Prime Minister of being populist. In the first round, more than 71% of the country's 8.1 million eligible voters cast ballots, an absolute record. The results for this round showed that the Socialists won 42.1% of the votes, against 41.1% for the governing coalition of Fidesz-MPP and MDF. In the closely fought contest, voter turnout was even higher in the second round elections than in the first round. Moreover, the results of the second round of parliamentary elections produced a shift in power. The coalition of opposition Socialists and Liberals managed to narrowly defeat the ruling conservatives of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Fidesz-MPP and MDF, two of the three government parties before the election, ran a joint list and joint candidates in every single-member district. While these two parties together won more seats than the socialist MSZP, they formed separate factions in the new parliament. Thus, MSZP ended up as the single biggest party in the new parliament; hence, there was no serious dispute about which party's prime ministerial candidate should be asked by the head of state to make the first attempt at forming a new government after the election. (2) The survey was conducted between April 11 and 19, 2002, between the two rounds of the 2002 Parliamentary elections. The Central Statistical Office’s census list served as the starting point for sample construction. Localities were stratified by county and population size. Within each stratum, primary sampling points were selected at random with a probability proportional to their population size. A random route procedure was followed to select households. A Kish Table was used to select respondents within households. The response rate was 60.5%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ICELAND (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Before the election, the country was governed by a centre-right coalition government formed by the Independence Party and the Progressive Party. The Independence Party leader and Prime Minister, Davi Oddsson, who had been in power for twelve years, was strongly opposed to EU membership. The Progressive Party, on the other hand, was in favor of EU membership. In his campaign, Oddsson focused on his economic record and offers of tax cuts. He had the advantage of having provided several years of steady economic growth. Inflation and unemployment were also low, compared to elsewhere in the European Union and the Nordic countries. The opposition Social Alliance, headed by former Reykjavik Mayor Ingibjorg Sorlun Gisladottir, had pushed a campaign based largely on voter fatigue and a growing awareness that Iceland must do more to prevent a growing gap between rich and poor. The Alliance also capitalized on criticism that the Independence Party had moved too slowly to reform a complex system set up in the 1980s, of distributing fishing quota licenses among Iceland's fisheries. However, the Social Alliance got less mileage out of its campaign to hold a referendum on whether Iceland should join the European Union. Oddsson's conservative Independence Party won 22 of the 63 seats at stake, just two more than the rival Social Alliance. The Independence Party remained the biggest force in Parliament despite losing four seats. The junior partner in the outgoing coalition, the Progressive Party, kept all of its 12 seats. (2) This is post-election, telephone election study, conducted between May 15 and June 29, 2003. The sample was randomly selected from The National Register (on which the electoral register is based). People under 18 years of age on election day and people over 80 years of age were excluded. At least 10-20 attempts at contacting respondents were made over maximum 45 days before declaring a household a non-interview. The response rate was 64.3%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - IRELAND (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The outgoing legislature was the only one to have served its full term of office since 1943. The three-week electoral campaign focused on social services, as the government had been criticized over the state of health and education. Another issue was law and order, since the death of two police officers at the hands of joyriders in April 2002. The government was also credited with popularity as it was a signatory to the Good Friday Agreement of 10 April 1998, aimed at bringing peace between Protestants and Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland. The final results showed that the Prime Minister's Fianna Fáil party won 80 of the 166 seats, while the main opposition, the Fine Gael party, obtained 31 seats, 23 less than in the outgoing legislature. The third force in the House, the Labour Party, won 21 seats (an increase of four seats). The Progressive Democrats also performed well, doubling their representation to eight seats. The Green Party increased its presence in the newly elected House of Representatives, obtaining six seats. The Sinn Fein, the Irish Republican Army-linked party, won five seats, a large increase from the previous one seat obtained in the outgoing legislature. (2) This is a post-election, face-to face study, focused on the parliamentary elections of May 17, 2002. Persons living in institutions, approximately 2.7% of the population, were omitted from the sample frame. A three-stage clustered sampling approach was used. In the first stage, a random sample of PSUs was selected. In the second stage, a random sample of households was selected. In the third stage, a random person within a household was selected. The sampling frame used for this study was the most up-to-date national electoral register. Electors are recorded in the electoral list in so-called Polling Books. For sample selection purposes, these polling books were reconstituted into area units known as District Electoral Divisions. There is a total of 3,400 District Electoral Divisions (DEDs) in Ireland. These DEDs are the most spatially disaggregated area units in Ireland for which census data are available. Furthermore, they are the standard PSU building block for random sample selection. Once the Electoral Register was re-structured into the District Electoral Division structure, a random sample of 220 PSUs was selected. Each PSU was made up of the District Electoral Division or aggregate thereof using a minimum population threshold criteria. A sample of 25 addresses was selected from within each of the 220 PSUs. This was the second stage of sample selection. Households were randomly selected from within the PSU. Individuals were then selected from within households using the 'next-birthday' rule. This was the third stage of sample selection. The response rate was 60%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ISRAEL (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Elections were held for all the seats in Parliament following its premature dissolution in November 2002. General elections had previously been held in May 1999. In November 2002, Prime Minister Sharon dissolved parliament and called early elections, nine months before the scheduled date, after the Labour Party, his largest coalition partner, withdrew from government in a dispute over the 2003 budget. The general elections were preceded by party elections to choose a leader for the Labour Party in November 2002 and a leader for the rightist Likud Party one month later. The electoral campaign focused on security issues, as the elections were held against the background of the conflict with the Palestinians, the potential U.S. attack on Iraq, and the global "War on Terrorism". Voter turnout was close to 68.5%, an all-time low. The previous record for low voter turnout was set in 1949, when 75% of all eligible voters cast ballots. Official results showed that Ariel Sharon was the first incumbent Prime Minister to win re-election since the 1980s. His Likud Party won 37 seats while the Labour Party had its worst showing ever, losing seven of the 26 seats it had picked up in the last Knesset elections in 1999, when it became the largest single faction in Parliament. The Shinui Party became the Knesset's third largest party, more than doubling its strength from six seats in the outgoing Parliament to as many as 15 in the incoming one. (2) The Israeli CSES module was applied immediately after the Knesset elections of January 28, 2003. It was a telephone survey that included only listed phone numbers. It is estimated that approximately 8% of households do not have telephones; as a result, they were excluded from the sample frame. The response rate was 13% (52% refused, in 27% of cases contact was not established, and 8% were non-sample lines). Three contacts were made with the household before declaring it non-interview. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ITALY (2006) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The outgoing President of the Republic, Mr. Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, dissolved parliament on 11 February 2006 and called parliamentary elections for 9 and 10 April 2006. Because of changes to the electoral law, the revised proportional representation system favored the formation of coalitions, and the provision relating to constituencies for Italians abroad (electing six senators and 12 deputies) came into effect for the first time. Two coalitions dominated the 2006 elections: the House of Freedoms, led by Italy's longest-serving Prime Minister, Mr. Silvio Berlusconi, and the Union, which incorporated the Olive Tree coalition. Mr. Romano Prodi, former prime minister and former president of the European Commission, was chosen in October 2005 to lead the Union coalition. The economy and the presence of Italian troops in Iraq were the main issues on the agenda during the election campaign. Prime Minister Berlusconi had pledged a stronger economy under his leadership. However, the GDP growth rate stagnated at 0.8 per cent per year and youth unemployment remained high. During the election campaign, he promised to abolish property tax, while his rival Mr. Prodi promised to boost the economy by reducing labor costs and the country's deficit. Both leaders pledged to withdraw Italy's troops from Iraq by the end of 2006. Allegations of corruption and bribery related to the Prime Minister's private business interests formed a backdrop to the campaign. Although the share of the vote was very close, the electoral system provides a bonus for the party or coalition with the highest score. Therefore, after including the results from the constituencies abroad, the Union won 348 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, while the House of Freedoms held 281 seats. In the Senate, the Union narrowly won with 158 seats of the 315 elective seats, only two more than the House of Freedoms. (Sources: PARLINE database: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parline.htm) (2) The Italy 2006 Election Study was conducted between May 10th and 16th, 2006, as a post-election study using face-to-face interviews. The sample frame included citizens eligible to vote. The sample frame excluded residents of the Trentino Alto Adige region. Also excluded were people who work in advertising or marketing, and those who were surveyed during the last six months. Consequently, an estimated 5% of the eligible population was excluded from the sample frame. Only one contact was made with each household before declaring it non-sample or non-interview. (3) The study includes a demographical weight variable based on population distribution which adjusts the sample distribution of gender, level of education and geopolitical Cattaneo areas. The employed reference to design this weight was the Italian census of 2005. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - JAPAN (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The July 11, 2004 elections were held to renew half of the House of Councilors, the upper house of the Parliament. Opinion polls had shown that Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) could lose several seats in the upper house as his coalition was under criticism for its changes to the pension systems and for deploying Japanese troops to Iraq. Nevertheless, the election would not affect control of Parliament because the ruling coalition had a majority in the lower house. During the electoral campaign, Prime Minister Koizumi talked about his conservative administration's economic policies and said that, under the leadership of his Liberal Democratic Party, the world's second largest economy had recovered to a degree better than had been forecast. On the other hand, opposition Democratic Party (DPJ) president, Katsuya Okada, appealed to voters for a change in leadership. The opposition was looking for gains in the House of Councilors, appealing to voters angry about higher premiums and benefits cuts in the pension system and public opposition to Japan's military deployment in Iraq. Final results showed that the ruling Liberal Democratic Party had won 49 seats, one fewer than its 50 up for re-election, while New Komeito gained one seat to take it to 11. This gave the ruling coalition 139 of the 242 seats in the upper house. The DPJ increased its representation, winning 50 seats, up from the 38 it previously held. (2) This survey was a part of a large panel survey (Japan Election Study 3: 2001-2005 (9 waves)). The CSES Module 2 was part of the post-election wave that was conducted between July 15 - 26, 2004. The survey is based on face-to-face interviews. Sampling was based on the voting registry. The voting registry contains all the eligible voters over 20 years old. Included in the sample frame was name, gender, and date of birth. Once the samples were selected, their contact addresses along with names, gender, and age were copied in the sample master file. Primary sampling units were Electoral districts "chiten". The chiten (precincts) were selected by PPS selection mechanism, where the probabilities of the particular chiten’s selection are proportional to the relative size of the chiten. From each chiten, about 16 samples were selected with systematic selection, as all the eligible sample are contained in the list, systematic selection of sample resulted in EPSEM sample from each PSU. Response Rate: 56.6% (3) The original sample was selected with EPSEM design, therefore no sample weights were created, however due to the disproportionate attrition by PSU, the entry of new sample in latter waves caused non-EPSEM sample, therefore, this difference in selection probability were reflected as a sampling weight. It was not attempted to match sample demographic with known population estimates of the universe for the following reasons: 1> Often, during the years between each census (e.g., 5 years) the estimates from population registry are used as the estimates of the universe (this survey uses both population registry and the voting registry as sample frame.). Therefore the sample frame used in this study is comparable to a population frame; 2> Only a few studies examining coverage error of the voting registry and population registry were conducted in the 1970s at which point, the coverage error was minor. No other study was conducted ever since. Response weights were made by means of propensity weighing adjustment, using the information gathered in previous waves of the survey. As there are multiple waves of surveys in JESIII, the dataset were first re-constructed into one record per wave format (like that of survival data) and logistic model was fit, using response to each wave as a dependent variable and using various measurements from previous waves as predictors. As a result, the weighting did not try to correct/match distribution of the sample to known universe (i.e., census) but they referred to the distribution of variables in previous waves. The variables included in the propensity mode were, gender, age group (in category), college education as a dummy variable, income as categorical variable, home ownership as a dummy variable, employment status as a dummy variable, and summary statistics of "don't know" responses. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Parliamentary elections were held in 27 February 2005. The Kyrgyz opposition attempted to unite ahead of the poll, forming electoral blocs and pledging to work together to ensure free and fair elections. The opposition parties criticized the first round election results and called for the cancellation of the parliamentary elections and the holding of early presidential election. They held demonstrations in central Bishkek and in the south of the country. The runoff elections were again marred by accusations of electoral fraud. Opposition parties criticized the disqualification of a number of opposition candidates. Opposition leaders, supported by thousands of voters, continued to call for the entire parliamentary elections to be declared null and void. They also established a coordinating committee to control the situation in the country, and demanded that President Akayev resign and early presidential and parliamentary elections be held. Protest rallies had spread from the capital Bishkek to many other provinces by 24 March 2005. The government headquarters in the capital as well as state administrations in a number of provinces were occupied by protesting voters. On 24 March 2005, President Akayev fled Bishkek to Moscow, and Prime Minister Nikolai Tanayev submitted his resignation to the Parliament. Parliament held an emergency session on 24 March 2005, and appointed the head of the opposition coordinating committee, Mr. Kurmanbek Bakiyev, as acting prime minister. He then formed an interim government. The new parliament held its first session on 27 March 2005, and elected Mr. Omurbek Tekebayev as speaker. Mr. Akayev resigned on 4 April 2005. Early presidential elections were held on 10 July 2005 and Mr. Kurmanbek Bakiyev, who had been the acting head of State since 24 March 2005, was elected President. (Source: PARLINE database: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parline.htm) (2) The survey was conducted in February and March 2006, using face-to-face interviews in the Kyrgyz and Russian languages. This CSES study is primarily focused on the early Presidential election of July 10, 2005. Earlier in 2005, there were also Parliamentary elections (a first round conducted on February 27, and a second round on March 12, 2005). Sampling was based on combination of random route and quota sampling. Sample stratification was based on 7 geographic regions (oblast) and the capital of Kyrgyzstan. The number of interviews was defined for each region in proportion to the population size. In each sampling units quotas were established based on gender, age, level of education, employment and distribution of economics branches. Households were selected according to the random route method. In each household, only a single person was interviewed. (3) Note that in items that code parties from A to F (or I) (e.g., B3037, B3038, B5011, etc.), Kyrgyz parties are not ordered according to the election returns, but according to their popularity as expressed in the CSES party identification item B3029_1. The Kyrgyzstan CSES election study is focused on the early presidential election of July 10, 2005, but the candidates basically did not represent parties that respondents were asked about in the aforementioned items. As a result, the list of the parties is not applicable to the presidential election results items (B5005). These items list election results of the candidates that participated in the presidential election (see the corresponding election study note). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - MEXICO (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Elections were held for all the seats in the Chamber of Deputies when the members' terms of office expired. Opinion polls showed that while President Fox's approval ratings remained high, many voters across the country were disillusioned by his failure to fulfill the promise to create millions of jobs -- a promise he had made when he was elected in July 2000. Voters were also reported to be disappointed by his government's inability to push his main reform proposals through a divided Congress, where the opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) was the largest party in both Houses, and had stymied the President's proposals for changing Mexico at almost every turn. Mr. Fox's party, the second largest in the Chamber since July 2000, with 206 seats, was unable to pass bills such as opening the electricity industry to more private investment and levying a tax on food and medicine to increase spending on social services. President Fox and his aides acknowledged the lack of new jobs but argued that they had done all they could. The PRI had held uninterrupted power in Mexico for 71 years, until Mr. Fox won the presidency in 2000. In the run-up to the election, Fox traveled all over the country announcing new joint private-public investment projects to spur growth, while his top aides met with U.S. officials to announce a number of programs to encourage U.S. investment in Mexico's most job-poor areas. Other major campaign issues revolved around election financing scandals involving both major parties. For the 2003 elections, only 42% of the 64 million eligible voters cast votes -- a record abstention rate. This was seen as a clear sign of voters' disenchantment with the biggest political parties. (2) This is a face-to-face, post-election study focused on the Mexican legislative elections of 2003. The primary sampling units were electoral precincts clusters. The clusters were defined as groups of all of the precincts with similar electoral results and belonging to the same county (municipality). The second stage was the precincts within the clusters. The third stage was households within the precinct and the last stage was the respondent in the selected household. Respondents in the household were not selected randomly. Interviewers followed quotas of gender and age, taken from 2000 census data. Non-sample replacement method followed the same systematic selection used for the original sample line. Three contacts were made before declaring a sample line non-sample and/or non-interview. One recontact was used to persuade respondents to be interviewed. The response rate was calculated to be 52%. Sampling units were selected with unequal probabilities. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The 2002 election campaign revolved about the single person - Pim Fortuyn - a publicist and columnist, a newcomer on the Dutch political scene. His exceptional success at the municipal elections before the parliamentary elections demonstrated the electoral impact he could have in parliamentary elections. The two major coalition parties, PvdA and VVD, had intended to base their campaign on the strong economic performance of the purple coalition. However, Fortuyn managed to shift the campaign agenda and to turn the election into a referendum on the coalition’s policies on immigration, health, crime, and education. The strongest impact on the outcome of May 2002 elections had Pim Fortuyn’s assassination just 9 days before the election. The campaign was immediately suspended until after the funeral. Thousands paid their respects, and the ceremony was broadcast live on television. Thereafter, campaigning was kept very low key, especially by PvdA and the Green Left, which had been accused of 'demonizing' Fortuyn, so contributing to a political climate that brought about the murder. The List Pim Fortuyn, with 26 seats, made the best showing ever of a new party, ending up as the second largest party. The two parties that had long competed to become the largest party, VVD and PvdA, ended up in a close contest in third and fourth place. (Source: Adapted from Irwin and Van Holsteyn, 2004) (2) In the Dutch 2002 survey, the CSES module was included in a post- election panel, conducted immediately after the election, between May 16 and June 27, 2002. It is a face-to-face survey, but in the post-election wave, 374 persons were given the opportunity to answer the questions on a paper questionnaire, a computer diskette, or via Internet. 65 percent of these 374 respondents chose one of these options; 35 percent preferred a face-to-face interview. The primary sampling units were telephone connection (fixed lines). Each connection was checked to see if it belonged to a household. The household then became a sampling unit. Each household was sent a letter emphasizing the importance of participation in the survey and invited to participate in the survey. The response rate for the first wave was 28%, while the panel attrition for the second wave was 17.5%. (3) The study has two multiplicative weight variables, constructed by using the computer program Bascula. The demographic weight includes the characteristics sex, age, marital status, size of household, region of residence, and degree of urbanization. The political weight includes voting behavior as an additional population characteristic. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Elections were held for all the seats in the House of Representatives following the dissolution of Parliament. The Prime Minister, Helen Clark, called an early election at a time when support for the Labour Party, in opinion polls, exceeded 50% and the Alliance, the junior coalition Government party, was disintegrating. The election campaign was less in the mold of the traditional contest between the two main parties, Labour and National, than a preoccupation with which of the smaller parties would support a main party in forming a government. The same number of parties were returned to the House but in rather different configurations. The senior government party, the center-left Labour Party, increased its representation in the House by 3 seats, to 52 seats total. Yet, it was insufficient for an outright majority in order to govern alone. The main opposition party, the center-right National Party, obtained 27 seats, 12 fewer than in the 1999 election and the lowest result since the party's formation in 1938. The populist New Zealand First Party more than doubled its seats, winning 13, 8 more than in the 1999 elections. The center-right United Future New Zealand Party, a merger of United and Future New Zealand (the latter formerly the Christian Coalition Party), made an unpredicted strong showing, gaining 8 seats. The Labour Party entered into a coalition government agreement with Jim Anderton's Progressive Coalition Party on August 8, 2002. (2) The 2002 NZES deposit to the CSES was based on a postal self- completion questionnaire. The sampling frame was the electoral rolls (containing an estimated 94% of New Zealanders of voting age). Samples were drawn randomly from each of 69 electorates, the numbers sampled being proportionate to the numbers of names listed, except in the case of the seven Maori electorates, which were over-sampled. (3) New Zealand used a self-administered mail questionnaire, with "Don't Know" explicitly listed for many questions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - NORWAY (2001) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The turnout for the Storting 2001 elections was the lowest since 1927, with about 75% of the eligible voters casting votes. Results showed that the Labour Party suffered its worst election in 77 years, losing 22 seats, while the Socialist Left got the best results ever, gaining 14 new seats. The far-right Progress Party made a gain of 6, up from the 20 it had in the outgoing legislature. The electoral campaign focused on two issues: taxation and the state of public services. While the outgoing government promised continuity and focused on the fact that the United Nations had proclaimed Norway the country with the best standard of living in the world, the opposition parties declared that government should use the country's oil wealth to cut taxes and improve health and education. On 17 October 2001, the Labour Prime Minister, Jens Stoltenber, tendered his government's resignation. This paved the way for Kjell Magne Bondevika, the leader of the Christian People's Party, to head a right-wing coalition composed of the Conservatives, the Christian People's Party and the Liberal Left. Between the three they held a total of 62 seats. The backing from the far right would yield a total of 88 seats, five more than the required majority. (2) The study was designed as a pre-election and post-election panel study. Most of the demographic variables were asked in the pre-election survey. The respondents were randomly selected from population registers in selected primary sampling units. Three contacts were made with the household before declaring it a non-interview. Three recontacts were used to persuade respondent to be interviewed. Total panel attrition was 4%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PERU (2006) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) "On 9 April 2006, parliamentary elections were held in parallel with presidential elections. Poverty alleviation was a key issue in the 2006 elections, in a country where over 50 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line, despite economic growth averaging 4.5 percent in recent years. The final parliamentary election results showed a major defeat for the ruling Perú Posible Party, which won only two seats, a sharp decrease from 45. The biggest winner was the UPP, which took 45 seats, up from six previously. The APRA and the National Unity Party also made gains, winning 36 and 17 seats respectively. The Alliance for the Future took 13. Ms. Keiko Fujimori was elected with the highest individual score nationwide. In the presidential race, Mr. García of the APRA defeated Mr. Humala in run-off elections on 4 June 2006. After the elections, the Centre Front, the Perú Posible Party and the National Restoration formed a new party in Congress and allied to the APRA." (Source: Parline) (2) This study was conducted as a post-election face-to-face survey over the period May 18th to May 21st, 2006. The primary sampling units were housing blocks in urban areas, and the village in rural areas, all of which were randomly selected. In each block a predefined number of houses were selected using random systematic jumps. Individual respondents were selected by the proportional equivalent system using official demographic information. The response rate was 38.7%, All interviews were conducted in Spanish. (3) Demographic weights are calculated according to the proportion of the population in the regions where the sample was taken. They match the spatial distribution of the population among the regions. Political weights are calculated according to the official results of the first round of the presidential election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) On May 10, 2004, Philippine voters went to polls to elect the president, vice-president, twelve senators, and all the members of the House of Representatives, together with 17,000 local government posts. Incumbent President, Gloria Arroyo, was looking to win her first popular mandate, as she had inherited the presidency in 2001, when Joseph Estrada was deposed by street protests. Under the Constitution, an elected President cannot run again, but Arroyo was vice-president under President Estrada and completed his term. Her main rival in the race was Fernando Poe Junior, the country's best-known film star, who was allegedly backed by Joseph Estrada. There were three other runners: Raul Roco, a former education secretary, Panfilo Lacson, the former Police Chief, and Eduardo Villanueva, an Evangelical preacher. The election battle was fought mainly on personality and ignored the important current issues in the country such as poverty, an underperforming economy, a looming debt crisis, Islamic militant terrorism, Muslim and Communist insurgencies, and birth control. Arroyo presented herself as a "safe pair of hands" for the economy and was backed by the business sector, while Poe ran on his film star reputation as "Mr. Clean", adored by the poorest classes because of his screen roles playing an underdog superhero battling for the oppressed. The elections were marred by numerous complaints that many people had been left off the voters' lists or could not find their voting precincts. There were also many reports of violence during the campaign. The released figures showed that 141 people were killed and 192 wounded in election-related violence since December 2003. The removal of former President Joseph Estrada in a military-backed uprising was the main source of bitterness that had divided the country. About 230,000 police and troops were deployed at polling stations throughout the country in an effort to contain the violence. According to reports in the local press, some voters were handed envelopes of cash or free lunches if they voted for certain candidates. Other voters complained that the indelible ink aimed at preventing double voting washed off with suspicious ease. Poe's supporters protested in the streets disputing the fairness of the election. Opposition candidates also claimed that the extremely slow manual counting of votes, which was completed about a month after the election, was also another avenue for cheating. Reacting to criticism by international observers, President Arroyo conceded there were flaws in the elections, but declared the problems were isolated and warned the opposition against stirring up trouble. Official results showed that of the 12 Senate seats at stake, the ruling K4 coalition (Coalition for Truth and Experience for the Future, led by the President's Lakas- Christian Muslim Democrats) obtained 7. It also won 184 of the 212 seats of the House of Representatives (Lakas-CMD 93, the Nationalist People's Coalition 54, the Liberal Party 34, Kampi 3) while the opposition Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (LDP) obtained 11 seats. (2) This post-election face-to-face survey was conducted between August 5 and 22, 2004, in five languages: Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocano, Ilonggo, and Bicolano. For sampling purposes, the Philippines was divided into four study areas: National Capital Region (NCR), Balance Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The sample size for each of the four study areas was 300 voting-age adults. Multi-stage probability sampling was used in the selection of sample spots (60 spots per area). The three study areas, apart from NCR), were further divided into regions, and then provinces were selected from the regions according to the probability proportional to population size (PPS) of the region. Once the sample provinces were selected, 60 spots for each of the major areas were allocated among the sample provinces. Using the quota set for each spot in each region, the spots were distributed in such a way that each province was assigned a number of spots roughly proportional to its population size. For the third stage, within each sample spot, five households were established by systematic sampling (random route procedure). The individual respondents are identified using a probability selection table or the Kish grid. (3) The weights are used to match the major study areas (National Capital Region, Balance of Luzon, Visayas, Mindanao areas) with the distribution of the adult population given recent official (census) projections. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - POLAND (2001) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) One of the main subjects of the 2001 electoral campaign was the bad economic situation. Unemployment had jumped from 10 to 16 percent in the year prior to the elections and the government budget deficit had ballooned, forcing leaders to search for deep cuts and depressing investments. The economic development that the country had witnessed in the immediate post-communist period had benefited mainly the major cities. Outside the city center, small farmers have had to deal with rising costs and foreign competition, while steelworkers, factory workers, and coal miners face big job cuts. (2) This is a post-election survey, focused on the elections of September 23, 2001, when the new Sejm and Senat (Lower and Upper house) were elected. The sample used in this survey was a random sample, representative of the adult population of Poland. The sample was selected by applying a multi- level sampling scheme with stratifying on the first level. First level sampling units were statistical regions created by the Central Statistical Office (GUS) for census purposes and representative studies. Second level sampling units included households in the previously sampled regions. The sampling process was carried out by means of specially prepared computer software, adequate to the adopted scheme, using generators of random numbers of monotonic distribution. First and second level units were sampled from the data sets about regions and districts, belonging to GUS. Third level sampling units were adults who permanently inhabit selected households. The interviewer selected one person as a respondent by means of the "Kish method" among the inhabitants of a given household. The study was conducted from September 29th to October 11th, 2001. Announcement cards were sent by CBOS prior to interviewing to selected addresses. Initially, 3240 addresses were selected. 1794 interviews were carried out and sent for analysis, which accounts for about 55.4% of the sample. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The March 2002 elections were held for all seats in the Assembly following the premature dissolution of this body in December 2001. General elections had previously been held in October 1999. On March 5, 2002, the official campaign for the general election on March 17, 2002 opened, with economic issues at the fore. The election, the second in the country in two and a half years, followed the sudden resignation of the Socialist Prime Minister, Antonio Guterres, after his party's heavy defeat in local elections in December 2001. During the campaign, both parties, the incumbent Socialist and the main opposition party, the center-right Social Democrats (PSD), focused on stabilizing the State budget, introducing corporate tax reductions, raising productivity and reforming the education system. Additionally, the Social Democrats and the Popular Party agreed to form a coalition government. (2) CSES Modules 1 and 2 were part of the same election study for Portugal 2002. This is a post-election study focused on the parliamentary elections in 2002. The survey was conducted between March 23 and April 8, 2002, immediately after the elections held on March 17, 2002. The sample frame was restricted to mainland Portugal (Azores and Madeira Islands were excluded from the sample frame), and included approximately 95.4% of the eligible population. The sample was stratified by NUTS II (5 regions in the mainland: North, Centre, Lisbon and Tagus Valley, Alentejo and Algarve) and HABITAT (eleven categories of localities by number of inhabitants). For each cell within the NUTS II and HABITAT frames, and according to the proportion of residents in each cell, the number of interviews was defined. Then, the number of localities inside each cell of the same frame was randomly selected, trying to ensure that no more than 10 interviews were done in the same locality. In each locality, the method of random route was used. In the household, respondents were selected using the following criteria: next person living in the household to have his/her birthday. If, on the first attempt to find someone in the housing unit, no one was there, no callback was done to this unit - rather, it was immediately substituted by another one. Three contacts were made with the household before declaring it a non-interview. The response rate was 81.4%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - PORTUGAL (2005) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) After dissolving the unicameral 230-member Parliament (Assembleia da Republica) on December 10, 2005, Portuguese President Jorge Sampaio called parliamentary elections for February 20, 2005, more than one year earlier than scheduled. He had criticized the conservative government led by Prime Minister Pedro Santana Lopes of the Social Democratic party (PSD), who resigned on December 11, 2004, for having failed to cope with the economic slump. Economic issues dominated the election campaign in this country of 10.3 million people, known as one of western Europe's poorest nations. Faced with an unemployment rate that reached 7.1 percent at the end of 2004, the highest in the last six years, the Socialists insisted on the need for more investment in technology and training, while PSD argued that productivity should be increased, and suggested raising the retirement age from 65 to 68. Socrates, of the opposition Socialist Party (SP), argued for the need to modernize the economy. He had opposed the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq and called for a closer foreign policy coordination with the EU Member States. The election results were marked by a major victory for the socialists and a crushing defeat for the conservatives. For the first time in its history, SP secured an overall majority by obtaining 121 seats out of 230. On the contrary, PSD recorded its worst result since 1983 with only 75 members elected, down from 148 in 1987 and 102 in 2002. Its coalition partner PP managed to win 12 seats, two fewer than in the previous election. The two partners in the Unitary Democratic Coalition (CDU) won a total of 14 seats: 12 for the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP) and 2 for the Green Ecological Party (PEV). The Left Bloc (BE) gained three more seats, or eight members in total. (2) The Portuguese post-election, face-to-face survey was conducted between March 5 and May 8, 2005. The sample was stratified by region (7 regions in the mainland: North, Centre, Lisbon-Lisbon district; Lisbon-Setúbal- district, Lisbon-other districts, Alentejo and Algarve) and habitat (three categories of parishes by number of registered voters: less than 3000; 3000-9999; more than 10000). Then, for each cell within the region and habitat frame, parishes were randomly selected with probability proportional to size, in order to ensure that the number of interviews would be proportional to the number of voters in each cell, since there was a previous decision of making the same number of interviews in each parish. The process of selection was systematically repeated until the electoral results of the 5 major political parties in those parishes, taking into account the intended number of respondents, were less than 1 percent different from the general results of mainland Portugal in the 2002 legislative election. The number of parishes selected and interviews conducted in each region/habitat stratum was proportional to the number of voters registered in each stratum. In each parish, random route was used to select the households. Individual respondents were selected using the following criteria: last person living in the household that had his/her birthday, with 18 or more years. The response rate was 31.2%. (3) The demographic weight was constructed on the basis of Census 2001 information about distribution of residents 18+ years of age in Continental Portugal on the basis of sex (2 strata), age (3 strata), and education (3 strata). The political weight was constructed on the basis of the 2005 election results in order to weigh the results of the vote recall question. The demographic and political weight variables were originally deposited with a number of cases having missing data. In the CSES data file, these cases are coded "0" (215 cases in B1010_2 and 428 cases in B1010_3). These are cases for which at least one relevant demographic and/or political variable was missing for the respondent. The collaborator preferred to assign a weight of "0" to these cases given that the demographic and/or political information was not complete for the case. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - ROMANIA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) On 28 November 2004 elections were held to choose the Head of State (the first round), and both Houses of the Romanian Parliament. According to the constitution, outgoing President Iliescu was not allowed to seek another term as President and instead he ran for a seat in the Senate under the banner of the ruling Social Democratic Party. A total of 12 candidates ran in the presidential elections but two favorites were outgoing Prime Minister Adrian Nastase (PSD) and the Justice and Truth candidate, Bucharest Mayor Traian Basescu. Both were fervently in favor of Romania joining the EU in 2007, and of maintaining close ties with the United States. They differed on domestic issues. The opposition Justice and Truth alliance said it would fight widespread corruption within the administration and introduce a flat 16 per cent tax on personal income and profits to crack down on the country's widespread illegal economy. The PSD countered by saying it alone had the experience to lead the country. Analysts said that voters could turn to Justice and Truth's blaming the ruling party for widespread corruption and low living standards but also said that many voters also credited the ruling party for bringing Romania into NATO and for boosting the country's economic growth. (Source: PARLINE database: http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parline.htm) (2) This post-election, face-to-face survey was conducted between December 14 2004 and January 7, 2005. The sampling procedure was based on localities, which were randomly selected from each strata of the population (defined by the region and size of locality). In each selected locality, two starting addresses were drawn at random by the principal investigators. Further addresses were selected by a random route procedure - as every fifth address from the initial address. In each household, one respondent was chosen using the "first birthday method". In the case the selected respondent could not be interviewed at the moment, the interviewer tried three more contacts with him (her). Response rate: 70%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - RUSSIA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The 14 March 2004 election was the third election for President since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the adoption of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation. The office of President of the Russian Federation embraces exceptional and wide-ranging executive powers. The previous four years in office of the incumbent President, Vladimir Putin, were chiefly characterized by a reviving economy, a consolidation of state power at the centre, and above all by the perception of stability that was broadly endorsed by the population at large. The seemingly overwhelming popularity of the incumbent - as evidenced by his consistently high approval ratings in public opinion polls before and during the election campaign - produced a sense of predictability in the outcome of the 2004 Presidential Election. The presidential election came barely three months after the December 2003 elections to the State Duma, the lower house of the federal parliament. Those elections had produced a significant shift in the configuration of Russian parliamentary politics. The association of the incumbent with United Russia had contributed to that party’s appeal to voters, and United Russia had emerged from the elections with a two-thirds State Duma majority. The established opposition parties had experienced a dramatic decline in their support, and were left preoccupied with the loss of a federal parliamentary presence or weakened party machinery. In combination, the factors of an incumbent in an apparently unassailable lead, and a weakened party political opposition, directly impacted on the selection of candidates to run against the incumbent. He faced a field of opponents who commanded little apparent public support. The better known of them, Irina Hakamada and Sergey Glazev, ran without the backing of their respective political party/bloc, and the rest had little profile nationally, including the two State Duma party-nominated candidates, Nikolay Kharitonov of the Communist Party (CPRF) and Oleg Malyshkin of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDPR) who were not the leaders of their respective parties. In the course of the campaign none of the rival candidates articulated any expectation of being able to defeat the incumbent, whilst one, Sergey Mironov, openly supported him. Source OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Report, Political Background http://www1.osce.org/documents/odihr/2004/06/3033_en.pdf (2) The survey was conducted as the second wave of a panel of election studie in Russia. The first wave was conducted after the Duma election in 2003. The second wave, which included the CSES module, was a post-election, face-to-face study focused on the March 14, 2004 Russia presidential election. Interviews were conducted over the period April 4 to May 11, 2004. The sampling frame covered 95% of the total eligible population, excluding those who lived in the far eastern depopulated regions of Kamchatka Oblast or Sakhalin Island, those who lived in areas of conflict such as the Republic Chechnya, and those who lived in separated areas such as Kaliningrad Oblast. Moreover, institutionalized persons in prisons, hospitals and the armed forces were excluded from coverage. The sampling design was based on the following formula. First, 2029 consolidated raions (akin to counties in the US) were stratified into 38 strata based largely on geographical factors and level of urbanization, but also based on ethnicity. Moscow city, Moscow oblast and St. Petersburg city were selected for certainty as self-representing stratum. Other raions were allocated to 35 strata of roughly equal size and randomly drawn using probability proportional to size as primary sampling units. Each selected PSU was stratified into urban and rural substrata, and targeted sample size was allocated proportionally to the two substrata. In the rural substrata, villages served as the SSUs. On the other hand, in the urban substrata basically the census enumeration districts were employed as the SSUs with little supplemental information if the district's information was not available. After SSUs were selected with PPS, an enumeration of dwelling units was made by visual inspection and recourse to official documents. Finally, the required number of dwellings were selected systematically starting with a random address in the list. The Kish procedure was used to select one eligible adult from each household. After three contacts without response the household was treated as non-sample. After at least three unsuccessful visits to a household, the household was treated as non-interview/refusal. A maximum of seven contacts were made to persuade respondents to be interviewed. In the first wave, the interviewers succeeded in completing 1648 interviews out of 3347 sample lines (51.4%). Out of 1648 samples interviewed at the first wave, 1492 (90.5%) of the respondents were re-interviewed in the later wave. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Voters in Slovenia went to the polls to elect the 90 members of the National Assembly in the first elections since the country joined the European Union in May 2004. Public opinion polls had suggested that the ruling coalition, led by Prime Minister Anton Rop's Liberal Democrat Party (LDS), would retain leadership although polls also indicated that half the electorate was dissatisfied with the work of the Government and the Parliament. The LDS, which had been in power for most of the past 12 years, had suffered a setback on 13 June 2004, during the first elections to the European Parliament (EP) held in the country. During the electoral campaign, Prime Minister Anton Rop vaunted the results he had achieved as head of government including on the economic front. Slovenia's GDP per inhabitant is 72% of the European average i.e. a level equal to that of Greece and Portugal. Mr. Rop promised that, if elected, his mandate would focus mainly on education and research, while Mr. Jansa promised to improve access to healthcare and education, to develop environmental policy and to ensure a decent income for all. The elections resulted in a surprise victory by the conservative Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) over the ruling Liberal Democracy of Slovenia (LDS) by a narrow margin. The SDS won 29.1 per cent of the vote, i.e. 13.3 points more than during the 2000 general elections. This party obtained 29 seats, while its coalition partner, the Nsi won 8.9 per cent of the vote and nine seats. Together both parties obtained one seat more than the three parties of the outgoing coalition together. The Liberal Democrat Party (LDS) won 22.82 percent of the vote (23 seats), while the United List of Social Democrats (ZLSD) won 10.20 per cent (10 seats) and the Democratic Pensioners' Party (DeSUS) obtained 4.04 (4 seats) just enough for the 4 per cent threshold, necessary to be represented in the National Assembly. (2) This study was conducted as a face-to-face post-election survey over the period March 17th, 2005 to April 25th, 2005. The study sampling frame corresponds to the Central Register of Population (CRP) and includes all residents with permanent address, including both citizens and non-citizens (in principle at least 99% of the population). The study employed a stratified two-stage probability sampling method in which the primary sampling units (clusters of enumeration areas, CEA) were selected using the following procedure: first, the entire country was divided into about 9000 CEA’s and stratified according to 12 regions x 6 types of settlements. After this, fixed numbers of CEA were selected inside each strata with probability proportional to size of CEA. In total 136 CEA were selected. Then 12 persons in each primary sampling unit were chosen by simple random sampling. Persons selected from Central Population Register were identified by name and address. Five contacts were made with the household before declaring it non-sample. The response rate was 64.0%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The electoral campaign got under way after months of political confrontation that culminated on March 12, 2004 with the impeachment of President Roh Moo Hyun. Roh's powers were suspended until a decision by the Constitutional Court was taken. Three opposition parties, the conservative Grand National Party (GNP), the former ruling Millennium Democratic Party and the right wing United Liberal Democrats, pushed the impeachment vote in the National Assembly to oust the reformist President, on charges of election law violations, incompetence and corruption. The President's impeachment, the first one since the founding of South Korea in 1948, polarized the country's politics and sent tens of thousands of demonstrators into the streets condemning the vote by the National Assembly as a "parliamentary coup". On 14 May 2004, Roh was reinstated after the Constitutional Court rejected two of the impeachment counts against him and ruled that the third one (violation of electoral neutrality) was insufficient grounds for his removal from office. Two months later, on May 20, the President joined the Uri Party. Ahead of the general elections, the National Election Commission (NEC) issued a series of new regulations in order to ensure a free and fair exercise. Final results showed that the pro-government Uri Party obtained 152 seats of the 299 in the National Assembly. The Uri Party's emergence came at the expense of the main opposition Grand National Party, which will no longer command a simple majority as it obtained only 121 seats. The Progressive Democratic Labour Party made its debut with 10 seats, in sharp contrast with the Millennium Democratic Party, which was reduced to a minor party with a mere 9 seats. (2) This is a post-election, face-to-face study, conducted between April 15 and 22, 2004; that is, immediately after the Parliamentary election that took place on April 15, 2004. Sampling procedure was based on randomly selected electoral districts. For each electoral district, a quota of respondents was then determined, reflecting the whole population distribution in terms of age and sex (quota sampling). The sample frame excluded Cheju island and other small islands since people in these regions, who comprise a very small percentage of the total population, are difficult and costly to contact. (3) "The election was conducted under a new electoral system, a mixed- member majoritarian system that combines 243 single-seat districts (SSDs) with 56 proportional representation (PR) seats, elected from a single nation-wide district. Each voter casts two votes, one for an individual in the SSD tier, and one for a closed party list in the PR tier." (Cho, 2005, p. 526). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SPAIN (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) "The general election in Spain on March 14, 2004 was held only three days after the most lethal terrorist attack in the history of Western Europe. In the wake of the massacre in Madrid, electoral participation was unusually high. Against most expectations and survey polls, the People’s Party (PP), which had been in government for eight years under the leadership of Jose-Maria Aznar, was defeated by the Socialist Party (PSOE), led by Jose-Luis Rodriguez Zapatero." (Colomer, 2005, pp. 149-50). The initial electoral campaign focused on the battle against ETA (the Basque separatist group). After the terrorist attack, it seemed that if the voters accepted the government's assertion, putting blame on ETA (an accusation ETA denied), Aznar's party would be rewarded at the polls. But if people saw al Qaeda's hand in the carnage, voters might view the attacks as retribution for Aznar's Iraq policy and punish his party when they voted. Spaniards had reacted furiously in 2003 when Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar aligned himself with U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to support the invasion of Iraq. The government had to back away from its initial certainty that ETA was behind the attacks as news emerged that a van with detonators and an Arabic-language tape had been found in a town where three of the bombed trains originated. A larger than expected 77 per cent of the electorate turned out to vote. The government was voted out of office as voters gave the Socialist Party 42.6 per cent of the vote. The very first day of the new government, Zapatero ordered all Spanish troops to be withdrawn from Iraq. (2) The CSES survey was conducted in the period March 15-20, 2004, immediately after the parliamentary elections of March 14, 2004. The survey is based on face-to-face interviews, on a random sample of respondents. The sample frame covered approximately 99% of the total population, although it excluded two North African cities: Ceuta and Melilla. The interviews were distributed among the 17 Autonomous Regions in proportion to their population and to community size within each region. Municipalities with more than 500,000 inhabitants were all included, while the remaining units were randomly selected. Once the number of interviews to be done was been established (by size of community and autonomous region), a computerized system to randomly extract municipalities and electoral sections was applied. The number of electoral sections randomly selected was related to the total number of interviews to carry out in the municipality. A random route system was applied for household selection. In case of refusal or non-contact, the interviewer went to the next household. Age and sex quotas were used for respondent selection. These quotas were established in each sampling point according to the ration between size of community and age and sex at the national level and regional level in the regions of Cataluńa, Andalucía, and País Valenciano. In the other regions, the distribution was proportional. (3) The original demographic weight variable adjusts for sex and age. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SWEDEN (2002) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The national election was held on September 15, 2002. Local and regional elections were held at the same time. The electoral campaign was dominated by immigration and the future of the large public sector, as voters had to decide whether they wanted to go on paying among the world's highest taxes to finance their welfare state, or if they preferred a rightist recipe of tax cuts, privatization, and deregulation. Prime Minister Göran Persson, who leads the ruling Social Democrats, campaigned for more public spending on such welfare state cornerstones as health and care of the elders, education and security. A promise to cut taxes seemed to have played a role in the narrow lead in opinion polls of the opposition bloc, formed by four center-right parties. One important issue that both sides sidestepped was whether the country should join the European Union's Economic and Monetary Union and the common currency, the Euro, which would entail sweeping economic change for Sweden. At 80.11%, turnout was lower than in previous elections. The Social Democrats, together with the ex- communist Party of the Left and the Greens, won over 53% of the votes and obtained 191 seats in Parliament. The opposition Moderate Party turned in its worst performance since 1973, obtaining 15.26% of the votes and 55 seats, while the Liberal Party increased from 4.7% in 1998 to 13.3% in 2002. After the election, the Social Democrat Party leader, Göran Persson, began a third term as Prime Minister in a minority government as he had refused to enter into any formal coalition arrangement with the Party of the Left or the Greens, largely because of their opposition to EU membership. (2) The Swedish election study was separated into two samples, one pre-election sample and one post-election sample. The CSES Module 2 was included in the post-election, face-to-face part of the study. Due to Swedish data laws the respondents in the Swedish election study 2002 were asked if they agreed their answers would be a part of international data set accessible on the Internet. Among the respondents there were 6 percent (70 respondents) who did not want to be included in the dataset. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2003) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Elections were held for all the seats in the National Council at the end of the members' terms of office. The electoral campaign focused on the issues of the old-age and survivors' insurance scheme and the future of social insurance. The Swiss voiced their concern at rising unemployment (3.7%) and pension reform (the prospect of a retirement age of 67 years was vehemently opposed). Other more peripheral issues included the conduct of economic policy during a recession (attack by the Socialist Party on the Christian Democratic People's Party) and immigration policy (dual initiative pending from the Swiss People's Party on asylum and naturalization) as well as environmental issues. The issue of European Union membership, meanwhile, proved so unpopular that it was dropped by all the parties with the exception of the Socialists. The Swiss People's Party (SVP/UDC), led by Christoph Blocher, became the largest party in the National Council. The SVP/UDC, a right-wing populist party, ran an advertising campaign in the run-up to the elections portraying asylum seekers and refugees as criminals, thereby earning itself a rebuke from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). According to the official results, the SVP/UDC now holds 55 out of the 200 seats in the National Council, a gain of 11 seats since the last election. Just behind is the Socialist Party (SP/PS) with 54 seats, an increase of three. The gains made by the People's Party were mainly at the expense of the Christian Democratic People's Party (CVP/PDC) and the Radical-Democratic Party (FDP/PRD), both of which lost seven seats, with respective tallies of 28 and 36. The Greens won 13 seats, compared with 9 in 1999. (2) This is a post-election study, focused on the Swiss parliamentary elections of October 19, 2003, conducted between October 20 and November 2 of the same year. It was conducted in three languages (German, French and Italian), as a combination of telephone and mail-back surveys. The CSES module was conducted as a supplementary postal survey completed by all respondents from the telephone sample willing to answer a supplementary self-administered questionnaire. Total panel attrition was 31.8%. The sample weight variable adjusts for the differential attrition rate. Sample for the telephone survey was drawn from fixed subscribers to conventional telephone networks (households were randomly selected from the Swisscom directory). Approximately 2-3% of the population were excluded from the sample frame because of not possessing a telephone or other reasons. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - TAIWAN (2001) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) This is the first election since the introduction of a unicameral (or, at most, semi-bicameral) legislative system in April 2000. The National Assembly is a now a non-standing body, convened on special occasions only: "within three months of the expiration of a six-month period following the public announcement of a proposal by the Legislative Yuan to amend the Constitution or alter the national territory, or within three months of a petition initiated by the Legislative Yuan for the impeachment of the President or the Vice President." It is to have 300 delegates 'nominated by political parties on the basis of proportional representation". (2) This is a post-election, face-to-face election study, focused on the Taiwanese parliamentary election of December 1, 2001. It was conducted between January and April 2002. The sample frame includes approximately 98% of the eligible population. The primary sampling units were randomly selected - boroughs and villages at the township-level and neighborhoods at the urban level. A principal component analysis and cluster analysis were applied to divide the 329 township-level units into 9 strata. Subsequently, according to the probabilities proportional to size (PPS), approximately 12 respondents from each sampled borough or village and 4 respondents from every selected neighborhood were randomly selected. After three visits without success, the sampled respondent was replaced by the supplemental sample, according to the identical socio-demographic characteristics (area, sex, and age) of the first-sampled respondent. The response rate was 35.39%. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - TAIWAN (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The main candidates for the 2004 presidential election were affiliated with two large coalitions, respectively. For the Pan-Green coalition, led by the DPP, the incumbent President Chen Shui-bian and Vice-President Annette Lu ran for a second four-year term. For the Pan-Blue coalition, the KMT’s chairperson, Lien Chan, ran for the presidency, with James Soong (PFP) as vice-president. The Pan-Green coalition consisted of the two pro- independence parties, DPP and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), while the Pan- Blue coalition consisted of the KMT, PFP, and the New Party (NP) which were pro-reunification. Established in 1986 during the last years of President Chiang Ching-kuo’s administration, the DPP started as a a rag-tag coalition of opposition stalwarts to what is now known as a well-organized electoral party. The DPP’s main issue position was that Taiwan is a separate entity from mainland China, which distinguishes it from the position taken by the parties within the Pan-Blue alliance. The KMT was the dominant party since Chiang Kai-shek moved from mainland China to set up his government- in-exile. Since 1986, however, the KMT has undergone substantial change, including "Taiwanization", under Lee Teng-hui. Since 2000, the KMT has become, internally, a more democratic party, in contrast to the Leninist- type party of the past (Tan, 2002). The most obvious difference among Taiwan’s parties was on the issue of national identity. The most notable feature of the election campaign, however, was the failed assassination attempt on President Chen on the eve of polling day. This was one of the closest elections that Taiwan has witnessed since the ushering in of democratic elections. The incumbent, Chen Shui-Bian of the DPP, and his running mate, Annette Lu, won 50.1% of the vote; the opposition, the Pan-Blue alliance with the KMT leader Lien Chan and PFP leader James Soong won 49.9%. With an increase of almost 11 points on its vote share in 2000 (39.3%), the DPP team won just marginally more than half the vote. This increase represents two very significant developments in Taiwanese electoral politics: the continuing growth of the DPP, and the decline of the Pan-Blue alliance (especially the Kuomintang). (2) This is a post-election, face-to-face election study focused on the March 20, 2004 Taiwanese presidential election. Interviews were conducted between June 2004 and September 2004. The sample frame included approximately 98 percent of the eligible population. The sample design was based on official information provided by the Interior Department. A cluster analysis was employed to divide the 359 township-level units into 9 strata. Subsequently, and according to probabilities proportional to size (PPS), approximately 2 to 14 townships were randomly selected from each strata, and then 4 to 28 boroughs or villages from each selected township. Finally, 10 to 16 respondents were sampled from every selected borough or village through systematic sampling. After three visits without success, the sampled respondent was replaced by the supplement sample according to the identical socio-demographic characteristic (i.e., area, sex, and age) of the first-sampled respondent. The response rate was 27.2%. (3) The Taiwanese 2004 election study includes one weight variable. The demographic weight uses gender, age, education level, and area (based on the level of socio-economic development). The aggregative indexes of gender, age, and socio-economic development are based on official documents released by the Interior Department. In addition, since the information about education released by the official document may be under- estimated, the index of education comes from the adjusted estimations of Professor Yung-tai Hung of Political Science, National Taiwan University. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> ELECTION SUMMARIES AND GENERAL NOTES - UNITED STATES (2004) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) In the November 2, 2004 elections US citizens voted for President as well as the entire membership of the House of Representatives and one third of the members of the Senate. Incumbent President George W. Bush's main challenger was the democratic candidate, Senator John F. Kerry from Massachusetts. The campaign was hotly contested with the war in Iraq being a critical issue. President Bush's approval rating had been high, especially when Saddam Hussein was so quickly ousted from power with the U.S.-led military intervention on Iraq. However, as a result of the continuing insurgency against U.S. and Iraqi government forces, the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction that the Bush administration had used to justify the war, the revelation that some U.S. soldiers had abused Iraqi prisoners, and growing concern that the war might have created more terrorist enemies than it had defeated had adversely affected his popularity. But the Iraq issue was also a difficult one for Senator Kerry, as the public wondered whether he would have handled it better, in light of his support for the congressional resolution that had authorized the war and his subsequent vote against funding the Iraq operation. Regarding the domestic agenda, President Bush set said he would tackle education, health care, energy and the economy, putting emphasis on limited government spending, individual responsibility and the power of markets. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), at the invitation of the U.S. State Department, sent some 100 observers to the country at the beginning of October to observe the final weeks of the campaign, election day and counting procedures. In its report, the OSCE declared that the elections had "mostly met" standards for freedom and fairness and reflected a "long democratic tradition". The turnout was the highest since 1968. President Bush won re-election, gaining another four-year term and a clear endorsement from a majority of voters. In the Congress, the Republican Party increased its representation in the Senate by four seats. It will retain control of the new Senate with 55 seats against 44 for the Democratic Party and one seat held by a Democratic-leaning independent. In the House of Representatives, the Republican Party obtained a net gain of three seats, taking its tally to 231 members, the most since 1946. (2) The 2004 American National Election Study was conducted on a fresh multi-stage area probability sample intended to be representative of the United States. Identification of the 2004 ANES sample respondents was conducted using a four stage sampling process: a primary stage sampling of U.S. Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) or New England County Metropolitan Areas (NECMAs) and non-MSA counties, followed by a second stage sampling of area segments, a third stage sampling of housing units within sampled area segments, and concluding with the random selection of a single respondent from selected housing units. To be eligible for interview, respondents had to be United States citizens who were 18 years of age or older on Election Day. Pre-election interviews, averaging 70 minutes in length, were conducted September 7 through November 1, 2004. No interviewing was conducted on election day, November 2. Post-election interviews, averaging 65 minutes, were administered November 3 through December 20, 2004. Randomization, employed for selection of half-samples to reduce overall interview length and for question order within batteries, was implemented by the CAI instrumentation. The total sample included 1,833 eligible persons and produced 1,212 pre-election interviews for a response rate of 66.1%. In the post-election study, 1,066 persons granted re-interviews for a reinterview rate of 88.0%. The CSES Module 2 questionnaire was administered to the 1,066 post-election respondents, at the end of their post-election interview. =========================================================================== ))) BIBLIOGRAPHY =========================================================================== "2002 General Election - Official Result." Official Election Results for New Zealand. Retrieved on August 2, 2004 from: http://www-ref.electionresults.org.nz/index.html Abazov, Rafis (In pres). The parliamentary election in Kyrgyzstan, February/March 2005, Electoral Studies, Available online 9 August 2006 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V9P-4KKWVGR-1/2/ db45320a9ed83aac8949b8a6e9f3125f). Adam Carr's Electoral Archive. Retrieved from: http://psephos.adam-carr.net/index.shtml Agpalo, Ruben. Comments on the Omnibus Elections. Rex Printing Company, Inc, Quezon City, 2004 Albanian Constitution http://www.cec.org.al/2004/eng/legjislacion/kushtetuta/ kushtetutaframeset.htm Albanian Central Election Commission http://www.cec.org.al/2004/eng/indexShqip.htm Alţingiskosningar 2003. Election results 2003 from: http://www.kosning2003.is/web/English?ArticleID=1071 Anckar, Carsten and Dag Anckar: Finland. In Dieter Nohle (ed.), Elections in Europe. A Data Handbook. Oxford University Press, forthcoming. Andersen, Jřrgen Goul (2003). The general election in Denmark, November 2001. Electoral Studies 22, 153-193. Andersen, Jřrgen Goul (in press) "The parliamentary election in Denmark, February 2005." Electoral Studies, Available online 28 November 2005. Assembly of the Republic of Portugal. Retrieved from: http://www.parlamento.pt The Australian House of Representatives: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/index.htm The Australian Senate: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/index.htm Balinski, Michel and Victoriano Ramírez González (1997). "Mexican electoral law: 1996 version." Electoral Studies, Volume 16, Issue 3, 329-40. Balinski, Michel and Victoriano Ramírez González (1999). "Mexico's 1997 apportionment defies its electoral law." Electoral Studies, Vol. 8, 1, 117-124. "Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany." Retrieved November 17, 2004 from: http://www.bundestag.de/htdocs_e/info/030gg.pdf The Basic Law of the HKSAR: http://www.info.gov.hk/basic_law/fulltext/ The Belgian Chamber of Representatives: http://www.fed-parl.be The Belgian Senate: http://www.senate.be/ Bernas, Joaquin. The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary. Rex Printing Company, Inc, Quezon City, 1996 Biroul Electoral Central (Romanian Election Commission) http://www.bec2004.ro/rezultate.htm Brazilian Electoral Data (1982-2002) Electronic Edition. Retrieved February 22, 2005: http://www.iuperj.br/deb/ing/ Brazilian Electoral Data (1982-2002). Senate Elections. Electronic Edition. Retrieved February 22, 2005: http://www.iuperj.br/deb/ing/Cap3/Cap3_tab9.htm The British Election Study. Retrieved: http://www.essex.ac.uk/bes/ "Bundestag election 2002." Official election results for German Bundestag. Retrieved on November 17, 2004 from: http://www.destatis.de/presse/englisch/wahl2002/p2027211.htm Bustani, Camilla (2001). The 1998 Elections in Brazil. Electoral Studies 20, 305-339. Butler, David and Gareth Butler (2006). British Political Facts Since 1979. London: Palgrave. Calvo, Ernesto and Juan Manuel Abal Medina (2002). "Institutional gamblers: Majoritarian representation, electoral uncertainty, and the coalitional costs of Mexico's hybrid electoral system." Electoral Studies, Volume 21, 3, 453-471. The Câmara dos Deputados (Chamber of Deputies): http://www.camara.gov.br/ Carty, R. K. (2005). Canadian politics and the general election of 2004. European Journal of Political Research, 44, 968-974. Center Vlade za Informatiko (Government Center of Information, Slovenia). http://volitve.gov.si/dz2004/en/index.htm Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation http://pr2004.cikrf.ru/president_engl_ver.html Chilean Constitution. From: http://www.servel.cl/servel/index.aspx?channel=143 Chilean Electoral Service (SERVEL), Retrieved from: http://www.servel.cl Cho, Wonbin (2005). The general election in South Korea, April 2004. Electoral Studies 24, 511-551. Clarke, Harold D., David Sanders, Marianne C. Stewart and Paul Whiteley (2004). Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Code of the Kyrgyz Republic On Elections in the Kyrgyz Republic http://www.legislationline.org/legislation.php?tid=57&lid=1224&less=false Colomer, Josep M. "The general election in Spain, March 2004" Electoral Studies, Volume 24, Issue 1, March 2005, Pages 149-156. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/general/constitution/constit.pdf Congreso de los Diputados: http://www.congreso.es/ The Constitution for the Republic of Korea: http://korea.assembly.go.kr/res/low_01_read.jsp?boardid=1000000035 and http://korea.assembly.go.kr/board/down.jsp?boarditemid= 1000000155&dirname=/eng_data/1000000155E1.PDF The Constitution of Belgium. Retrieved on April 7, 2005, from: http://www.fed-parl.be/constitution_uk.html Constitution of the Czech Republic: http://www.senat.cz/informace/zadosti/ustava-eng.html The Constitution of Finland: http://www.finlex.fi/pdf/saadkaan/E9990731.PDF The Constitution of Ireland. [Bunreacht na hÉireann.] Retrieved July 30, 2004: http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/static/256.pdf The Constitution of Japan. Retrieved from: http://www.sangiin.go.jp/eng/law/index.htm The Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway. Retrieved July 08, 2004 from: http://www.stortinget.no/english/constitution.html The Constitution of the Kingdom of the Netherlands 2002. Retrieved: http://www.minbzk.nl/uk/constitution_and/publications/the_constitution_of The Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic: http://eng.president.kg/constitution_ev/new_const_ev/ Or: http://www.tragicdoughnuts.com/kyrgyzstan/constitution.html The Constitution of Mexico. Retrieved August 8, 2004 from: http://www.ilstu.edu/class/hist263/docs/1917const.html The Constitution of the Portuguese Republic. Retrieved July 28, 2004 from: http://www.parlamento.pt/ingles/cons_leg/crp_ing/index.html The Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria. Retrieved July 30, 2004 from: http://www.parliament.bg/?page=const&lng=en The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. Retrieved from: http://www.comelec.gov.ph/laws/consti.html The Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Retrieved July 14, 2004 from: http://www.sejm.gov.pl/english/konstytucja/kon1.htm Constitution of Romania http://domino.kappa.ro/guvern/constitutia-e.html The Constitution of Spain: http://www.senado.es/constitu_i/index.html The Constitution of the Swiss Federation. Retrieved August 10, 2004 from http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/sz00000_.html The Constitution of the United States: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/index.html The Constitutional Act of Denmark of June 5, 1953: http://www.ft.dk/pdf/constitution.pdf "CNE Resultados." Election results for Portugal. Retrieved July 28, 2004 from the Official site of the National electoral Commission (CNE): [http://www.eleicoes.cne.pt/resultados5.html Coakley, John and Michael Gallagher (eds.) (2004). "Politics in the Republic of Ireland." Routledge. Constitutional Affairs Bureau, HKSAR: http://www.info.gov.hk/cab/ The Danish Parliament - The Folketing (People's Diet): http://www.folketinget.dk/ Dardanelli, Paolo (2005). "The parliamentary and executive elections in Switzerland, 2003." Electoral Studies, Vol. 24, 123-160. Direzione Centrale dei Servizi Elettorali, Dipartimento per gli Affari interni e territoriali.Ministero dell' Interno, Italia. http://politiche.interno.it Downs, William M. and Raluca V. Miller (2006). "The 2004 presidential and parliamentary elections in Romania". Electoral Studies, 25, 393-415. Dutch Electoral Council http://www.kiesraad.nl/uk Elecciones Generales de 14 de Marzo de 2004. (Election results, Total and District). Retrieved February 1, 2005 from the Central Electoral Commission site: http://www.congreso.es/ingles/elecciones/resultados_generales_2004.pdf "Election 2002 for the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic." Retrieved on November 29, 2005 from http://www.volby.cz/pls/ps2002-win/ps4?xjazyk=EN Election Results Australia: Australian Election Commission. Retrieved on May 4, 2005 from: http://results.aec.gov.au/ "Election results." Elections for the 16th Knesset, Israel. Retrieved August 3, 2004 from: http://www.knesset.gov.il/elections16/eng/results/regions.asp Elections Canada On-line. Retrieved October 28, 2005 from: http://www.elections.ca "Elections for 39th National Assembly." Election results for Bulgaria 2001, retrieved July 30, 2004, from the official site of the National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria: http://www.parliament.bg/?page=ns&lng=en&nsid=8 Elections in the National Assembly of he Republic of Slovenia, 3rd October 2004, Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia. Retrieved from: http://www.stat.si/pxweb/Database/General/06_elections/06078_elections/ 06078_elections.asp Electoral Affairs Commission’s Report on the 2004 Legislative Council Election: http://www.info.gov.hk/eac/en/legco/2004_report.htm "Electoral alliance and votes cast per electoral alliance by constituency in Parliamentary elections in 2003" in p. 216-217 in book Parliamentary elections 2003. Official Statistics of Finland. Elections 2004:1. Helsinki: Statistics Finland, 2004. The Electoral Code Of The Republic Of Albania http://www.cec.org.al/2004/eng/legjislacion/kodizgjedhor/ kodizgjedhorframeset.htm The Electoral Commission. United Kingdom. Retrieved: http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk "Erst-und Zweitstimmen in allen Wahlkreisen im csv-Format für eine Weiterverarbeitung in einem Tabellenkalkulationsprogramm [data file]." Retrieved April 4, 2003 from: http://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/bundestagswahl2002/deutsch/ ergebnis2002/btw2002/index_btw2002.htm Federal Election Commission of the United States. Retrieved from: http://www.fec.gov/ Federal Election Commission of the United States. Retrieved April 26, 2005 from: http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2004/2004presgenresults.pdf Federal Electoral Institute of Mexico (source for election results, retrieved August 10, 2004): http://www.ife.org.mx/ Federal Law No 175-FZ of December 20, 2002. <>. Retrieved from: http://www.cikrf.ru/cikrf/eng/law/Federal_Law_N175.doc Federal Law No FL-19-FZ of December 27, 2002.<>. Retrieved from: http://www.cikrf.ru/cikrf/eng/law/FL-19-FZ.doc The Finnish Parliament Statistics 2003. (February 4, 2005) http://www.eduskunta.fi/efakta/esite/englanti/statistics2003.pdf Finnish Statistical Office website: http://www.tilastokeskus.fi/index_en.html Fowler, B. (2003). "The parliamentary elections in Hungary, April 2002." Electoral Studies, Vol. 22, No. 4, 799-807. Galen, Irwin A. and Joop J.M. Van Holsteyn (2004). "The 2002 and 2003 parliamentary elections in The Netherlands." Electoral Studies 23, 545-571. Gallagher, Michael, Michael Marsh and Paul Mitchell (eds.) (2003). "How Ireland Voted 2002." Hampshire, UK: Palgrave. Garry, John (2004). "The general election in Ireland, May 2002." Electoral Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1, 155-160. Geddis, Andrew (2004). "The general election in New Zealand, July 2002." Electoral Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1, 149-155. General Election 2005. Research Paper 05/33 (17 MAY 2005). House of Commons Library. Retrieved January 8, 2006 from: http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2005/rp05-033.pdf. Grzybowski, Marian and Piotr Mikuli (2004). Poland. In "Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe", 2nd revised and updated edition, ed. by Sten Berglund, Joakim Ekman, and Frank H. Aarebrot. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar. Guidelines on Election-related Activities in respect of the Legislative Council Elections: http://www.info.gov.hk/eac/en/legco/2004lc_guide.htm Hardarson, Ólafur Th. Parties and voters in Iceland. A study of the 1983 and 1987 Althingi elections. Social Science Research Institute- University Press, University of Iceland, Reykjavík 1995. Hardarson, Ólafur Th. "Iceland" in G. E. Delury (ed.) (Third Edition edited by D.A. Kaple) World Encyclopedia of Political Parties and Systems. Facts on File Publications, New York (1999), Vol. II, pp. 473-482. Hardarson, Ólafur Th. "The Icelandic Electoral System 1844-1999" in A. Lijphart og B. Grofman (eds.) The Evolution of Electoral and Party Systems in the Nordic Countries New York:Agathon Press, 2002, pp. 101-166. Hardarson, Ólafur Th. and Gunnar Helgi Kristinsson, "Iceland", European Journal of Political Research 43: 1024-1029, 2004. Hardarson, Ólafur Th. and Gunnar Helgi Kristinsson (2001). The 1999 Parliamentary Election in Iceland. Electoral Studies, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp. 325-331. Hardarson, Ólafur Th. and Gunnar Helgi Kristinsson, "Iceland" in European Journal of Political Research, 38:3-4, 408-419, 2000. Harper, M. A. G. (2003). "The 2001 parliamentary and presidential elections in Bulgaria." Electoral Studies, 22, 335-344. Hazan, Reuven Y., and Abraham Diskin (2004). "The parliamentary elections in Israel, January 2003." Electoral Studies 23, 329-360. Helms, Ludger (2004). "The federal election in Germany, September 2002." Electoral Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1, 143-149. Homepage of the federal parliamentary elections on May 18, 2003. Retrieved on April 6, 2005 from: http://polling2003.belgium.be House of Councillors: The National Diet of Japan. Retrieved from: http://www.sangiin.go.jp/eng/member/f_d_5.htm and http://www.shugiin.go.jp/index.nsf/html/index_e_guide.htm House of Representatives Directory, 2005 Edition (Philippines). House of Councillors (Upper House). Retrieved from: http://www.sangiin.go.jp/eng/index.htm Ignazi, Piero (2006). "Italy". European Journal of Political Research, 45, 1143-1151 Indridason, Indridi H. "A Theory of Coalitions and Clientelism: Coalition Politics in Iceland 1945-2000". Forthcoming in the European Journal of Political Research. Japan: Central Election Management Council. Retrieved from: http://www.mha.go.jp/ Jesse, E., 2000. The electoral system: more continuity than change. In: Helms, L. (Ed.), "Institutions and Institutional Change in the Federal Republic of Germany". Macmillan, London, pp. 124-142. Karasimeonov, Georgi (2004). Bulgaria. In "Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe", 2nd revised and updated edition, ed. by Sten Berglund, Joakim Ekman, and Frank H. Aarebrot. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar. Kavanagh, Dennis and David Butler (2005). The British General Election of 2005. London: Palgrave. Kiesraad. Elections in the Netherlands. Retrieved from: http://www.kiesraad.nl/contents/pages/6154/electionsindenetherlands.pdf Kiesraad. The Dutch Elections Act. Retrieved from: http://www.kiesraad.nl/contents/pages/3426/kieswet.pdf Klesner Joseph L. (2002). "Presidential and congressional elections in Mexico, July 2000." Electoral Studies, Volume 21, Issue 1, 140-147. Körösényi, András (2002). "Government and Politics in Hungary." Budapest: CEU Press. Kristinsson, Gunnar Helgi, "Parties, States and Patronage" in West European Politics, 19:3, 433-457, 1996. Kristinsson, Gunnar Helgi, Farmers' Parties. A Study in Electoral Adoption. Reykjavík: Félagsvísindastofnun Háskóla Íslands, 1991. The Kuk Hoe (National Assembly): http://www.assembly.go.kr/index.jsp Kuvendi i Republikes se Shqiperise http://www.parlament.al Kyrgyzstan Election Commission - http://www.shailoo.gov.kg/ Law Library of Congress. Election Law: http://www.loc.gov/law/guide/elections.html LeDuc, Lawrence (2005). The federal election in Canada, June 2004. Electoral Studies, 24, 303-344. "Legislativas 2002." Results of elections in Portugal retrieved July 12, 2002: http://www.eleicoes.mj.pt/legislativas/D230000/230000_IS.html Legislative Council Ordinance (Chapter 542 of the Law of Hong Kong): [http://www.legislation.gov.hk/blis_export.nsf/CurAllEngDocAgent? OpenAgent&Chapter=542] Leonard, Dick and Roger Mortimore (2001). Elections in Britain: A Voter's Guide. 4th ed. London: Palgrave. Ley 180603 Orgánica Constitucional de los Partidos Políticos, Republic of Chile. Retrieved from: http://www.servel.cl/servel/index.aspx?channel=123 Ley 18.700 Orgánica Constitucional sobre Votaciones Populares y Escrutinios, Republic of Chile. Retrieved from: http://www.servel.cl/servel/index.aspx?channel=125 McAllister, Ian (2005) The Australian federal election, October 2004. Electoral Studies 24, 511-551. McAllister, I. (2003). "The federal election in Australia, November 2001." Electoral Studies, Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 381-387. Millard, F. (2003). "The parliamentary elections in Poland, September 2001." Electoral Studies, Vol 22, 367-374. "Ministere de l'interieur: Election presidentielle 2002." Elections France. Retrieved April 30, 2004 from: http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/avotreservice/elections/presid2002/ Ministerio del interior. Spanish election results. Retrieved June 14: 2005: http://www.elecciones.mir.es/MIR/jsp/resultados/index.htm Nicolau, Jairo (2004). The October 2002 elections in Brazil. Electoral Studies 23 (2004) 329-360. Nolledo, Jose. The Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines National Book Store, Inc, Metro Manila, 1996 Nurmi, Hannu and Lasse Nurmi (2004). The parliamentary election in Finland, March 2003. Electoral Studies 23, 557-565. Office of the Official Register. U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. U.S. Electoral College: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/electoral_college/index.html Official Website for the 2004 Legislative Council Election: http://www.elections.gov.hk/elections/legco2004/eindex.html Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales, Republica del Peru. http://www.onpe.gob.pe/elecciones2006/elec2006.php Paloheimo, Heikki: The Rising Power of Prime Minister in Finland. Scandinavian Political Studies, vol. 26(2993): 3, p. 219-244. "Państwowa Komisja Wyborcza: Protokól Państwowej Komisji Wyborczej z dnia 26.09.2001 r. o zbiorczych wynikach glosowania na okręgowe listy kandydatów na posłów." Election results, Polish Parliamentary Elections, 2001. Retrieved July 14, 2004: http://pkw.gov.pl/katalog/artykul/16213.html The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia: http://www.aph.gov.au/index.htm Parliament of Finland. Presentation Pages: http://www.eduskunta.fi/efakta/esite/englanti/eesit_02.htm#02 The Parliament of the Republic of Iceland (Althingi): http://www.althingi.is/vefur/upplens.html Parliamentary Elections and Election Administration in Denmark: http://www.ft.dk/BAGGRUND/00000048/00232623.htm "Parliamentary Elections in Hungary 2002." Retrieved April 20, 2003 from: http://www.election.hu/en/13/13_6.html Pasimio, Renato. The Philippine Constitution (Its Evolution and Development) and Political Science. National Book Store, Inc, Metro Manila, 1991. Plecitá-Vlachová, Klára and Mary Stegmaier (2003). "The Chamber of Deputies election, Czech Republic 2002." Electoral Studies, Vol. 22, No. 4, 772-778. Poslanecká Sněmovna (The Chamber of Representatives): http://www.psp.cz/ Portugal 2005 election results: Assembleia da Republica. Retrieved from: http://www.parlamento.pt/deputados/resultadoseleitorais/index.html "Project on Political Transformation and the Electoral Process in Post-Communist Europe. Poland - Constituency Data (2001)." Retrieved April 3, 2003: http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/database/indexConstituency.asp? country=POLAND&constituency=pl2001s Registration and Electoral Office, HKSAR: http://www.info.gov.hk/reo/index_en.htm "Republic of Bulgaria National Assembly: Elections for the 39th National Assembly." Retrieved January 1, 2003 from: http://www.parliament.bg/en/parliament.php?id=7 Republic of the Philippines Commission on Elections COMELEC. Retrieved from: http://www.comelec.gov.ph Republic of the Philippines Commission on Elections COMELEC. The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. Retrieved from: http://www.comelec.gov.ph/laws/consti.html "Results for the 29th Dail." Elections Ireland. Retrieved April 4, 2003 from: http://www.electionsireland.org Schafferer, Christian (2003). "The legislative Yuan election, Taiwan 2001." Electoral Studies, Vol. 22, No. 3, 532-537. The Senado Federal (Federal Senate): http://www.senado.gov.br/ Senát (The Senat): http://www.senat.cz/ Sitio Historico Electoral, Ministerio del Interior, Gobierno de Chile . Retrieved from:http://www.elecciones.gob.cl/ Statistics Finland site. Parliamentary election results. Retrieved February 8, 2005:http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/taskue_vaalit.html Statistics Iceland. Election results 2003. Retrieved March 21, 2005: [http://www.hagstofa.is/template_lb_frameset_en.asp?PageID= 325&intPXCatID=142&ifrmsrc=template_lb_content.asp?PageID=433] "Stortingsvalget 2001." [Storting Election 2001.]. Statistisk sentralbyrĺ [Statistics Norway], Oslo-Kongsvinger. "Storting Election 2001" Norwegian Election results, 2001. Retrieved July 06,2004: http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/00/01/10/stortingsvalg_en/ Suomen Eduskunta (Finnish parliament) - http://www.eduskunta.fi/ "Sveriges Officiella Statistik Statistiska Meddelanden: Riksdagsvalen 1973 - 2002." Statistics Sweden. Retrieved February 3, 2004 from: http://www.scb.se/templates/Publikation____71029.asp Swyngedouw, Marc (2004). The general election in Belgium, May 2003. Electoral Studies 23, 545-571. Swyngedouw, Marc (2002). The general election in Belgium, June 1999. Electoral Studies 21, 105-154. Swyngedouw, M., Billiet, J., Goeminne, B., Dewinter, L., Frognier A-P., Baudewyns, P., Berck A-S., "ISPO-PIOP 2003 General Election Study Belgium. Codebook: Questions and Frequency tables" Leuven/Louvain-la Neuve, 2004. Szajkowski, Bogdan (200&). The parliamentary election in Albania, July-August 2005. Electoral Studies, 26, 227-231. "Taiwan 2004 elections". Election results. Government Information Office, Republic of China (Taiwan). Retrieved from: http://www.gio.gov.tw/elect2004/ UK Electoral Commission. http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk Vaalit Val. Parliamentary Elections: http://www.vaalit.fi/15491.htm Valen, Henry (2003). "The Storting election in Norway, September 2001." Electoral Studies 22, 179-185. Vander Weyden, P., D'Hondt and Alternative D'Hondt for Two-Tier Districting Systems. The Belgian Electoral System'. IPSoM-Bulletin 2001/5, Brussels. Vander Weyden, P. Het Belgische Kiessysteem: de klassieke en alternatieve methode D’Hondt. Res Publica, VolXLIII ,2001(4), 595-616. "Taiwan 2001 elections". Election results, retrieved June 22, 2004 from: http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/yearbook/3 Tóka, Gábor (2004). Hungary. In "Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe", 2nd revised and updated edition, ed. by Sten Berglund, Joakim Ekman, and Frank H. Aarebrot. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar, pp. 289-336. "Übersicht Nationalrat Schweiz." Swiss Election results, 2003. Retrieved August 12, 2004: http://www.politik-stat.ch/nrw2003/CH/index.shtml Whiteley, Paul, Harold D. Clarke, David Sanders and Marianne C. Stewart (2005). "The Issue Agenda and Voting in 2005." In Pippa Norris and Christopher Wlezien, eds. Britain Voters 2005. Oxford: Oxford University Press. //END OF FILE