cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000970.v3
title: ISSP2010: Environment III

description: The last of 20 years of successful surveys for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in New Zealand, run by Professor Philip Gendall in the Department of Marketing at Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards environmental protection. Preferred government measures for environmental protection. Private entrepreneurs as best possibility to solve economic problems; responsibility of the government to reduce income differences among the citizens; highest and next highest priority in the own country; attitude to modern science (scale); attitude to the environment (scale).Judgement on the contrast of environmental protection and economic growth; economic growth harms the environment; earth cannot continue to support population growth at its present rate; willingness to pay higher prices and higher taxes or to accept reductions in standard of living for the benefit of protection of the environment; self-classification of participation in environmental protection (scale); estimation of dangerousness of air pollution caused by cars for the environment, for the respondent and their family.Classification of air pollution from industrial waste gases, pesticides and chemicals in agriculture, water pollution and a rise in the world´s temperature caused by the greenhouse effect, the modification of genes of certain crops as dangerous for the environment; preference for the regulation of environmental protection by the government, the population or the economy; estimation of the efforts of NZ to protect the world environment; more effort for the environment by business and industry, people in general or the government; attitude towards international agreements for environmental problems that each country should be made to follow; agreement with poorer countries to make less effort than richer countries to protect the environment; economic progress will slow down without better protection of the environment.Trust in government departments; frequency of own efforts to sort glass or tins or plastic or newspapers for recycling; frequency of not using the car for environmental reasons; membership in an environmental protection organization; personal environmental political activities in the last five years through participation in signing petitions, giving donations to environmental groups as well as participating in demonstrations; dangerousness of nuclear power stations for the environment; people can do little to change lives.Demography: age; sex; marital status; steady life-partner; years in school; current employment status; occupation (ISCO-88); employment in public sector; self-employed; number of employees; hours worked weekly; supervisor function; earnings of the respondent; family income; religious denomination; attendance of religious services; union membership; party affiliation (left-right); size of household; type of community: urban-rural; ethnic affiliation of respondent and language.
DOI: 10.17028/rd.lboro.2001129.v5
title: CREST Demand Model

description: The model is an integrated thermal-electrical demand model based on a bottom-up activity-based structure, using stochastic programming techniques to represent dwelling diversity, producing calibrated and validated output at high-resolution, based on reduced-order thermal-electrical networks to represent thermal dynamics, and developed as free open-source software to promote transparency and further research.Version 2.1. of this model was uploaded on 1st December 2015.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000967.v3
title: ISSP2009: Social Inequality IV

description: The nineteenth of 20 years of successful surveys for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in New Zealand, run by Professor Philip Gendall in the Department of Marketing at Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards social inequality. Social background and good relations as most important prerequisites for success in society; most important criteria for social mobility (scale: personal effort, intelligence or corruption); reasons for and acceptance of social inequality; Self-assessment of payment suitable for performance; estimation of actual and adequate monthly income for occupational groups; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; attitude to a progressive tax rate.Assessment of the economic differences between poor and rich countries; attitude towards compensation by additional taxes in the wealthy countries (Redistribution); justification of better medical supply and better education for people with higher income; assumption of conflicts between social groups in the country; self-assessment on a top-bottom-scale and expectation of the individual level in 10 years; social mobility; criteria for the classification of payment for work (scale: responsibility, education, supervisor function, needed support for family and children or quality of job performance); feeling of a just payment.Characterisation of the actual and the desired social system of the country, measured by classification on pyramid diagrams; Self-assessment of the respondent as well as classification of an unskilled factory worker and a chairman of a large corporation on a top-bottom-scale; number of books in the parental home in the respondent’s youth.Demography: age; sex; living together with a partner; marital status; school education; denomination; occupation status; profession (ISCO code); occupation in the public sector; autonomy; working hours per week; net income of the respondent; supervisor function; occupation status, profession and supervisor function of the partner; household structure; family income; size of household; city size; region; own unemployment within the last few years and duration of this unemployment; religiousness; frequency of going to church; forms of the faith in God; Self-assessment of the social class; union membership; party preference; participation in elections; living situation and living status; in some countries: ethnic membership of the respondent.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000970.v4
title: ISSP2010: Environment III

description: The last of 20 years of successful surveys for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in New Zealand, run by Professor Philip Gendall in the Department of Marketing at Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards environmental protection. Preferred government measures for environmental protection. Private entrepreneurs as best possibility to solve economic problems; responsibility of the government to reduce income differences among the citizens; highest and next highest priority in the own country; attitude to modern science (scale); attitude to the environment (scale).Judgement on the contrast of environmental protection and economic growth; economic growth harms the environment; earth cannot continue to support population growth at its present rate; willingness to pay higher prices and higher taxes or to accept reductions in standard of living for the benefit of protection of the environment; self-classification of participation in environmental protection (scale); estimation of dangerousness of air pollution caused by cars for the environment, for the respondent and their family.Classification of air pollution from industrial waste gases, pesticides and chemicals in agriculture, water pollution and a rise in the world´s temperature caused by the greenhouse effect, the modification of genes of certain crops as dangerous for the environment; preference for the regulation of environmental protection by the government, the population or the economy; estimation of the efforts of NZ to protect the world environment; more effort for the environment by business and industry, people in general or the government; attitude towards international agreements for environmental problems that each country should be made to follow; agreement with poorer countries to make less effort than richer countries to protect the environment; economic progress will slow down without better protection of the environment.Trust in government departments; frequency of own efforts to sort glass or tins or plastic or newspapers for recycling; frequency of not using the car for environmental reasons; membership in an environmental protection organization; personal environmental political activities in the last five years through participation in signing petitions, giving donations to environmental groups as well as participating in demonstrations; dangerousness of nuclear power stations for the environment; people can do little to change lives.Demography: age; sex; marital status; steady life-partner; years in school; current employment status; occupation (ISCO-88); employment in public sector; self-employed; number of employees; hours worked weekly; supervisor function; earnings of the respondent; family income; religious denomination; attendance of religious services; union membership; party affiliation (left-right); size of household; type of community: urban-rural; ethnic affiliation of respondent and language.
DOI: 10.17028/rd.lboro.2001129.v6
title: CREST Demand Model

description: The model is an integrated thermal-electrical demand model based on a bottom-up activity-based structure, using stochastic programming techniques to represent dwelling diversity, producing calibrated and validated output at high-resolution, based on reduced-order thermal-electrical networks to represent thermal dynamics, and developed as free open-source software to promote transparency and further research.Version 2.1 of this model was uploaded on 1st December 2015.Version 2.2 of this model was uploaded on 19th April 2016.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000970.v5
title: ISSP2010: Environment III

description: The last of 20 years of International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) surveys in New Zealand by Professor Philip Gendall, Department of Marketing, Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards environmental protection. Preferred government measures for environmental protection. Private entrepreneurs as best possibility to solve economic problems; responsibility of the government to reduce income differences among the citizens; highest and next highest priority in the own country; attitude to modern science (scale); attitude to the environment (scale).Judgement on the contrast of environmental protection and economic growth; economic growth harms the environment; earth cannot continue to support population growth at its present rate; willingness to pay higher prices and higher taxes or to accept reductions in standard of living for the benefit of protection of the environment; self-classification of participation in environmental protection (scale); estimation of dangerousness of air pollution caused by cars for the environment, for the respondent and their family.Classification of air pollution from industrial waste gases, pesticides and chemicals in agriculture, water pollution and a rise in the world´s temperature caused by the greenhouse effect, the modification of genes of certain crops as dangerous for the environment; preference for the regulation of environmental protection by the government, the population or the economy; estimation of the efforts of NZ to protect the world environment; more effort for the environment by business and industry, people in general or the government; attitude towards international agreements for environmental problems that each country should be made to follow; agreement with poorer countries to make less effort than richer countries to protect the environment; economic progress will slow down without better protection of the environment.Trust in government departments; frequency of own efforts to sort glass or tins or plastic or newspapers for recycling; frequency of not using the car for environmental reasons; membership in an environmental protection organization; personal environmental political activities in the last five years through participation in signing petitions, giving donations to environmental groups as well as participating in demonstrations; dangerousness of nuclear power stations for the environment; people can do little to change lives.Demography: age; sex; marital status; steady life-partner; years in school; current employment status; occupation (ISCO-88); employment in public sector; self-employed; number of employees; hours worked weekly; supervisor function; earnings of the respondent; family income; religious denomination; attendance of religious services; union membership; party affiliation (left-right); size of household; type of community: urban-rural; ethnic affiliation of respondent and language.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000958
title: ISSP2006: Role of Government IV

description: The sixteenth of 20 years of International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) surveys in New Zealand by Professor Philip Gendall, Department of Marketing, Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes to compliance with the law; attitudes to various forms of protest against the government; views on freedom of speech for extremists; attitudes to justice error; views on state intervention in economy; views on government spending for environmental protection, public health system, the police, education system, defence, pensions, unemployment benefits, culture and arts.Attitudes to welfare state and responsibility for jobs, price control, health care, decent standard of living, economic growth, reduction of income differences, support for students, housing supply and protection of environment; political interest; rating the government performance in providing health care and living standards as well as dealing with country’s security threats, controlling crime, fighting unemployment and protecting environment; attitude towards surveillance measures of the authorities in case of security challenges; political efficacy; trust in politicians and civil servants; assessment of tax equity with various income groups; trust in people; being treated fairly by public officials; treatment by public officials depends on personal contact; perceived amount of politicians and public officials involved in corruption; how often asked for bribe by public officials; number of persons in contact with per week.Demography: sex; age; marital status; steady life partner; years of schooling; highest education level; country specific education and degree; current employment status (respondent and partner); hours worked weekly; occupation (ISCO 1988) (respondent and partner); supervising function at work; working for private or public sector or self-employed (respondent and partner); if self-employed: number of employees; trade union membership; earnings of respondent (country specific); family income (country specific); size of household; household composition; party affiliation (left-right); country specific party affiliation; participation in last election; religious denomination; religious main groups; attendance of religious services; self-placement on a top-bottom scale; region (country specific); size of community (country specific); type of community: urban-rural area; country of origin or ethnic group affiliation. Additionally coded: Administrative mode of data-collection; weight.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000967.v4
title: ISSP2009: Social Inequality IV

description: The nineteenth of 20 years of successful surveys for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in New Zealand, run by Professor Philip Gendall in the Department of Marketing at Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards social inequality. Social background and good relations as most important prerequisites for success in society; most important criteria for social mobility (scale: personal effort, intelligence or corruption); reasons for and acceptance of social inequality; Self-assessment of payment suitable for performance; estimation of actual and adequate monthly income for occupational groups; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; attitude to a progressive tax rate.Assessment of the economic differences between poor and rich countries; attitude towards compensation by additional taxes in the wealthy countries (Redistribution); justification of better medical supply and better education for people with higher income; assumption of conflicts between social groups in the country; self-assessment on a top-bottom-scale and expectation of the individual level in 10 years; social mobility; criteria for the classification of payment for work (scale: responsibility, education, supervisor function, needed support for family and children or quality of job performance); feeling of a just payment.Characterisation of the actual and the desired social system of the country, measured by classification on pyramid diagrams; Self-assessment of the respondent as well as classification of an unskilled factory worker and a chairman of a large corporation on a top-bottom-scale; number of books in the parental home in the respondent’s youth.Demography: age; sex; living together with a partner; marital status; school education; denomination; occupation status; profession (ISCO code); occupation in the public sector; autonomy; working hours per week; net income of the respondent; supervisor function; occupation status, profession and supervisor function of the partner; household structure; family income; size of household; city size; region; own unemployment within the last few years and duration of this unemployment; religiousness; frequency of going to church; forms of the faith in God; Self-assessment of the social class; union membership; party preference; participation in elections; living situation and living status; in some countries: ethnic membership of the respondent.
DOI: 10.17028/rd.lboro.2001129.v7
title: CREST Demand Model

description: The model is an integrated thermal-electrical demand model based on a bottom-up activity-based structure, using stochastic programming techniques to represent dwelling diversity, producing calibrated and validated output at high-resolution, based on reduced-order thermal-electrical networks to represent thermal dynamics, and developed as free open-source software to promote transparency and further research.Version 2.1 of this model was uploaded on 1st December 2015.Version 2.2 of this model was uploaded on 19th April 2016.Version 2.3 of this model, now capable of modelling Indian households was uploaded on 5th February 2018Version 2.3.1 was uploaded on 2nd November 2018
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000967.v6
title: ISSP2009: Social Inequality IV

description: The nineteenth of 20 years of International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) surveys in New Zealand by Professor Philip Gendall, Department of Marketing, Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards social inequality. Social background and good relations as most important prerequisites for success in society; most important criteria for social mobility (scale: personal effort, intelligence or corruption); reasons for and acceptance of social inequality; Self-assessment of payment suitable for performance; estimation of actual and adequate monthly income for occupational groups; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; attitude to a progressive tax rate.Assessment of the economic differences between poor and rich countries; attitude towards compensation by additional taxes in the wealthy countries (Redistribution); justification of better medical supply and better education for people with higher income; assumption of conflicts between social groups in the country; self-assessment on a top-bottom-scale and expectation of the individual level in 10 years; social mobility; criteria for the classification of payment for work (scale: responsibility, education, supervisor function, needed support for family and children or quality of job performance); feeling of a just payment.Characterisation of the actual and the desired social system of the country, measured by classification on pyramid diagrams; Self-assessment of the respondent as well as classification of an unskilled factory worker and a chairman of a large corporation on a top-bottom-scale; number of books in the parental home in the respondent’s youth.Demography: age; sex; living together with a partner; marital status; school education; denomination; occupation status; profession (ISCO code); occupation in the public sector; autonomy; working hours per week; net income of the respondent; supervisor function; occupation status, profession and supervisor function of the partner; household structure; family income; size of household; city size; region; own unemployment within the last few years and duration of this unemployment; religiousness; frequency of going to church; forms of the faith in God; Self-assessment of the social class; union membership; party preference; participation in elections; living situation and living status; in some countries: ethnic membership of the respondent.
DOI: 10.17608/k6.auckland.2000967.v5
title: ISSP2009: Social Inequality IV

description: The nineteenth of 20 years of successful surveys for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) in New Zealand, run by Professor Philip Gendall in the Department of Marketing at Massey University.A verbose rundown on topics covered follows.Attitudes towards social inequality. Social background and good relations as most important prerequisites for success in society; most important criteria for social mobility (scale: personal effort, intelligence or corruption); reasons for and acceptance of social inequality; Self-assessment of payment suitable for performance; estimation of actual and adequate monthly income for occupational groups; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; attitude to a progressive tax rate.Assessment of the economic differences between poor and rich countries; attitude towards compensation by additional taxes in the wealthy countries (Redistribution); justification of better medical supply and better education for people with higher income; assumption of conflicts between social groups in the country; self-assessment on a top-bottom-scale and expectation of the individual level in 10 years; social mobility; criteria for the classification of payment for work (scale: responsibility, education, supervisor function, needed support for family and children or quality of job performance); feeling of a just payment.Characterisation of the actual and the desired social system of the country, measured by classification on pyramid diagrams; Self-assessment of the respondent as well as classification of an unskilled factory worker and a chairman of a large corporation on a top-bottom-scale; number of books in the parental home in the respondent’s youth.Demography: age; sex; living together with a partner; marital status; school education; denomination; occupation status; profession (ISCO code); occupation in the public sector; autonomy; working hours per week; net income of the respondent; supervisor function; occupation status, profession and supervisor function of the partner; household structure; family income; size of household; city size; region; own unemployment within the last few years and duration of this unemployment; religiousness; frequency of going to church; forms of the faith in God; Self-assessment of the social class; union membership; party preference; participation in elections; living situation and living status; in some countries: ethnic membership of the respondent.