DOI: 10.3886/icpsr03211.v4
title: Eurobarometer 54.2: Impact of New Technologies, Employment and Social Affairs, and Disabilities, January-February 2001
title: Version 4

description: This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from a focus on standard Eurobarometer measures, and instead assessed respondents' views on the perceived impact of new technologies, employment, moving, and issues related to people with disabilities. Interviews began by asking respondents if they felt important changes in the world were impacting them personally, how they felt about these changes, and what the impact of new technologies would be over the next five to ten years in terms of their daily lives, access to information, free time, feelings of security, risk of accidents, household chores, family and social relationships, and deterrence of criminal activities. They were asked how much they agreed that new technologies would reduce income inequalities, differences in educational and cultural opportunities, and the number of people excluded from society, as well as improve people's participation in the political process, create more possibilities for expressing one's opinions, provide more access to political representatives and the civil service via the Internet, and promote on-line voting for elections and referenda. Responses were also sought regarding who respondents felt benefited most from the Internet, if they had concerns about voting on-line, and who should deal with new ethical issues brought about by new technologies. Respondents were further questioned about whether they thought that over the next five to ten years people in general would undertake more or less work-related training, experience more or less work-related stress, change jobs more or less than today, work more or less hours per week, retire earlier or later, and what impact new technologies would have on employment opportunities. They were asked to what extent they agreed that it was necessary to master new technologies to find or keep a job, that the educational system taught new technology effectively, and that all pupils should have full access to new technologies, as well as who they thought should pay for work-related training on new technologies. Respondents with a job were asked how satisfied they were with their job in terms of earnings, job security, type of work, number of working hours, start and end times, length of travel time, how many times they had changed jobs in the last five years, how similar the skills required for their current job were to their previous job, and the reason for changing jobs. Those who thought they would change jobs in the next five years were asked if they thought the required skills would be similar or different and what would encourage them to make the change. Those who hadn't changed jobs in the last five years or didn't plan to change jobs in the next five years were asked why. All respondents with a job were also asked if they thought they would need new skills to improve future job prospects, if in the last year they had participated in training to improve their skills, and why they wanted or didn't want to improve their job skills. Respondents were next asked if they had moved in the last ten years or if they intended to move in the next five years. Those who had moved or intended to move were asked where, i.e., within the same city, different city-same region, different region-same country, different European Union (EU) country, or outside of the EU, and the reason for the move. Those not having moved and not intending to move were asked why not. All respondents were asked whether they would prefer to remain in their current region of residence or move to another region if they were unemployed, to what extent moving to a different geographical location in the next five years would improve their job prospects, if they would be willing to live in another EU country with a different language, how they felt about the number of foreigners in their country, and whether better career prospects, financial circumstances, social benefits, public services, or social life would encourage them to move. On the subject of the disabled, respondents were asked if they personally knew anyone (including a family member, friend, acquaintance, neighbor, colleague, client, pupil/student, or other) with a disability or infirmity that limited their activities, how at ease they felt in the presence of people with disabilities, and how at ease people in general felt in the presence of people with disabilities. They were asked how difficult they thought it was for certain groups of people with disabilities (i.e., blind, deaf, physically and intellectually disabled people) to access public transport and services, restaurants, university or school, their work place, sports events, and cultural events, whether access to public places for people with disabilities had improved over the last ten years, who was actually responsible for making improvements in these matters (e.g., local authorities, national government, nongovernmental organizations, the EU, etc.), and who should be responsible. They were asked to indicate how aware they were of each of 21 types of disabilities (e.g., visual, hearing, neuromuscular, skeletal, arthritis, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and others), what percent of the population in their country had a physical disability, how strongly they agreed that disabled persons should be more involved in society, that more money should be spent on removing physical barriers, and that children with disabilities should be taught in the same schools as other children, and whether they would feel at ease with a person in a wheelchair as their boss, next-door neighbor, colleague, a politician, an artist, a teacher, or a shop worker. Standard demographic information collected includes age, sex, occupation, nationality, marital status, vote intention, age at completion of full-time education, number of people in household, number of children under 15 in household, household income, size of locality, region of residence, religiousity, and language of interview (for select countries).
description: Please review the "Weighting Information" section of the ICPSR codebook for this Eurobarometer study.
description: Multistage national probability samples.
description: Datasets: DS1: Eurobarometer 54.2: Impact of New Technologies, Employment and Social Affairs, and Disabilities, January-February 2001
description: Citizens of the EU aged 15 and over residing in the 15 EU member countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the citizens in Norway. Smallest Geographic Unit: country
description: face-to-face interview(1) The codebook and setup files for this collection contain characters with diacritical marks used in many European languages. (2) Please refer to the "Processing Notes" and "Supplemental Variable Notation" sections in the ICPSR codebook for further information in regard to the addition of data for Norway. (3) With the addition of data from Norway, the total number of interviews is 17,103. (4) Although the Technical Specifications and the study title indicate that the survey was carried out between January 2 and February 6, 2001, it appears Norway carried out the survey between January 2 and February 18, 2001.