This dataset provides both quarterly and annual estimates of the value of the goods and services produced in Iowa as provided by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis in tables SAGDP2N, SAGDP9N, SAGDP10N, SQGDP2, and SQGDP9. Annual data is available beginning in 1997, and quarterly beginning 2005. The data include breakdowns of industries' contributions. Quarterly estimates are presented as an annual rate.

Gross domestic product (GDP) is the measure of the market value of all final goods and services produced within Iowa in a particular period of time. In concept, an industry's GDP by state, referred to as its "value added", is equivalent to its gross output (sales or receipts and other operating income, commodity taxes, and inventory change) minus its intermediate inputs (consumption of goods and services purchased from other U.S. industries or imported). The Iowa GDP a state counterpart to the Nation's GDP, the Bureau's featured and most comprehensive measure of U.S. economic activity. Iowa GDP differs from national GDP for the following reasons: Iowa GDP excludes and national GDP includes the compensation of federal civilian and military personnel stationed abroad and government consumption of fixed capital for military structures located abroad and for military equipment, except office equipment; and Iowa GDP and national GDP have different revision schedules. GDP is reported in millions of current dollars.

Real GDP is an inflation-adjusted measure of Iowa's gross product that is based on national prices for the goods and services produced within Iowa. The real estimates of gross domestic product (GDP) are measured in millions of chained dollars.

The annual per capita real GDP is also provided and is measured in chained dollars. In calculating the per capita real GDP, the real GDP is divided by the Census Bureau’s annual midyear (July 1) population estimates for the year.

This dataset is used to produce the "U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants" publication, known as the "Greenbook". The annual report to Congress on U.S foreign assistance flows is required by the Foreign Assistance Act, Section 634 and is the authoritative dataset of U.S. foreign assistance. The annual update of the dataset contains data of United States Government (USG) foreign assistance since 1945. Foreign assistance is categorized as either economic assistance or military assistance. Foreign assistance is reported by recipient country and organized by geographic region, without distinction between developed and developing countries. Any country which has received cumulative economic or military assistance over $500,000 since 1945 and is considered an "Independent State" by the U.S. Department of State merits an individual country reporting.

The ERS Food Expenditure Series annually measures total U.S. food expenditures, including purchases by consumers, governments, businesses, and nonprofit organizations. The ERS Food Expenditure Series contributes to the analysis of U.S. food production and consumption by constructing a comprehensive measure of the total value of all food expenditures by final purchasers. This series annually measures total U.S. food expenditures, including purchases by consumers, governments, businesses, and nonprofit organizations. Because the term expenditure is often associated with household decisionmaking, it is important to recognize that ERS's series also includes nonhousehold purchases. For example, the series includes the dollar value of domestic food purchases by military personnel and their dependents at military commissary stores and exchanges, the value of commodities and food dollars donated by the Federal government to schools, and the value of food purchased by airlines for serving during flights.

Gross domestic product (GDP) is the measure of the market value of all final goods and services produced within Iowa reporting using an annual rate. In concept, an industry's GDP by state, referred to as its "value added", is equivalent to its gross output (sales or receipts and other operating income, commodity taxes, and inventory change) minus its intermediate inputs (consumption of goods and services purchased from other U.S. industries or imported). Iowa GDP excludes the compensation of federal civilian and military personnel stationed abroad and government consumption of fixed capital for military structures located abroad and for military equipment, except office equipment. Real GDP is an inflation-adjusted measure of Iowa's gross product that is based on national prices for the goods and services produced within Iowa.

Pakistan's data extracted from the World Data Bank provides valuable insights into various factors that help deduce the country's Human Development Index (HDI) and economic situation. These indicators shed light on demographic trends, economic performance, and social development. Let's explore some key indicators and their implications for Pakistan's human development and economic status.

Urban population and Rural population: The distribution of the population between urban and rural areas indicates the level of urbanization and the development of infrastructure. A higher urban population might suggest better access to amenities and services in cities, while a larger rural population may indicate the importance of agriculture and the need for rural development.

Population and Population growth (annual %): The total population and its growth rate are crucial in assessing demographic trends and planning for the future. A high population growth rate can put strain on resources and social services, while a stable or declining growth rate allows for better management of development programs.

Gender-related indicators (Population, female, and Population, male (% of total population)): These indicators highlight gender imbalances in the population. A relatively equal distribution of male and female populations is crucial for gender equality and social development.

Birth rate, crude (per 1,000 people), and Mortality rate, infant (per 1,000 live births): Birth and infant mortality rates are essential indicators of healthcare and overall social development. Lower birth and infant mortality rates signify better healthcare facilities and improved living conditions.

GDP (current US$) and Inflation, GDP deflator (annual %): GDP represents the total economic output of a country and reflects its overall economic health. Inflation rates indicate the stability of prices and the impact on consumers' purchasing power.

GNI (current US$) and Gross national expenditure (current US$): GNI measures the total income earned by a country's residents, while gross national expenditure tracks the total spending on goods and services. These indicators help gauge the country's economic performance and fiscal health.

Total reserves (includes gold, current US$): Total reserves provide insight into a country's ability to meet its financial obligations and handle external economic shocks.

Services, value-added (current US$), Merchandise exports, and Merchandise imports (current US$): These indicators reflect the performance of the services and trade sectors, indicating the extent of economic diversification and international trade.

Military expenditure (current USD): Military expenditure is an essential factor in understanding a country's defense priorities and allocation of resources.

Adjusted savings: education expenditure (current US$) and Food production index (2014-2016 = 100): Investment in education is crucial for human development, while the food production index indicates a country's ability to meet its food needs and food security.

By analyzing these indicators collectively, policymakers, economists, and development experts can assess Pakistan's progress in human development and economic growth. Addressing challenges in healthcare, education, gender equality, and economic diversification can contribute to improving the Human Development Index and promoting sustainable economic development in Pakistan.

The database contains continuous chronological series of the main indicators of dynamics for the US economy in 1950-1996 and the results of a preliminary approximation of the corresponding analytical trends up to 2010. The database includes the values of GNP and GDP in the current and fixed prices, price deflators, shares of various industry groups in the structure of the domestic product, indicators of the dynamics for the total national income, values of exports and imports of goods, population data, indicators of general and sectoral employment and unemployment, basic indices of values for intermediate and final products in material production, the current volumes of capital investments, basic indices of production costs and consumer prices, as well as indicators of the national wealth of the United States. Particular attention was paid to inflation rates, the growth of military spending, the dynamics of public debt and such derived socio-economic indicators as the values of the total national product, income and wealth per capita. Due to some ongoing revisions to the US System of National Accounts (NIPA) introduced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the US Department of Commerce, all series have been updated to reflect the President's Economic Report of 1997. All the given series of indicators were verified with primary data sources and provided with reference linear charts of statistical trends. The basis for compiling the database was the official reference publications of the US federal departments, as well as statistical materials accumulated and processed in the Section of Economic Databases at the Institute for the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1985-1997.

This data contains the length of walls used at various locations in Baghdad during the US combat operations from 2003-2008. The walls were used for two main purposes- (i) protection against blast and (ii) enclosing neighborhoods to curtail inter tribal conflict. This data therefore separates the walls used for these proposes. The total length of blast and neighborhood wall was extracted using Fiji ImageJ software (Schindelin et al. 2012) from an infographic of concrete walls in Baghdad developed by Izady (2020) for the Gulf 2000 Project at Columbia University, a repository of infographics and maps of demographic and socio-political indicators of the Gulf Region

Militaries are among the most resource intensive institutions in the world, requiring vast volumes of material and energy for both domestic and foreign operations. As a result, militaries are some of the most polluting institutions as well, but very little is known about military contributions to climate change and other forms of environmental degradation, nor about their total material consumption. Furthermore, the accessibility of reliable data about military resource use and environmental damage is highly variable, and depends on military transparency, the context of military operations, and broader emissions reporting requirements between countries. Our preliminary research has shown that one novel, workable approach to examining a military's material footprint is to focus on the logistics that move raw materials move across global military and civilian supply chains. For example, by concentrating on procurement, purchase, and distribution of hydrocarbon-based fuels, we revealed that the U.S. military is a larger polluter than as many as 140 countries. However, a systematic study of the sourcing of raw materials and their circulation supply chains, including the resultant environmental damage, is entirely lacking.

This research will build on our previous work on the climate impacts of US military operations to look at other kinds of materials that have significant environmental impacts. We will source and collate secondary datasets that allow us to quantifying and visualize US military acquisition and use of three seemingly banal materials - sand, water, and concrete- that have serious environmental, social, and economic impacts when purchase and deployed in the large volumes that the US military did during the occupation of Iraq from 2003-2011. We will source this data from publicly available reports produced by the US Congressional Budget Office and individual procurement orders made by the Defense Logistics Agency, supplemented with data from Freedom of Information Act requests as needed. As the most extensive military operation of the 21st century, Iraq from 2003-2011 provides an ideal case study because procurement and supply chains are documented on digital spreadsheets and accessible for analysis, and because analysis of that data can help researchers, governments, and the public understand the consequences and impacts of foreign intervention in new and dynamic ways.

We will undertake a number of activities to make this data useful and available to a range of users, including policymakers and the US military itself. First, we will create a GIS database that collates currently disparate datasets and geographically situates the procurement, distribution and use of sand, water, and concrete. This spatial approach will allow us, and other researchers, to consider all manner of adjacent questions around the social, economic, and environmental impacts of material practices of US military during wartime. Additionally, following our previous research on US military fuel consumption, we will conduct life cycle analyses on all the materials we study, calculating not only the climate change impact of these materials in practice, but also other environmental consequences, such as local air pollution impacts. We will collate all this data and our analysis and visualizations thereof onto a public-facing data lab website, enabling anyone with a web browser to conduct high-powered quantitative analysis of the data for themselves. Further, we will produce policy-relevant literature on the environmental implications of war beyond the usual kinds of analysis in time for the next round of global climate change negotiations at COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021. We seek significant outreach to non-academic partners, such as the US and UK military, climate and environmental policymakers and civil society groups in our current network and beyond.

Figure 3 depicts China-Africa trade from 2000 to 2013. It shows that China-Africa trade consistently grew since the formation of the FOCAC in 2000. As can be seen in the figure, the US trade with Africa declined after the 2008 global financial crisis, allowing China to take the lead as Africa's largest trading partner. Figure 7 shows trade between China and Africa from 2003 to 2021. Although with fluctuations, trade between the two sides has been increasing since the establishment of the FOCAC mechanism. It reached a first high of US$203 billion in 2015 and then declined significantly the following year. However, the trade increased again from 2017 and surged to US$254 billion in 2021, up by 35% from the previous year. The high trade volume in 2021 has been attributed to the additional Chinese exports of Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs), such as masks and hazmat suits, as well as pharmaceutical products and testing equipment for the COVID-19 pandemic to Africa. However, Gu et al (2022: 11) indicated that the strong increase in China-Africa trade volume in 2021 is remarkable as data from China's customs agency shows that it is "made up of an increase in both Chinese exports to Africa (29.9% year-on-year) and African exports to China (43.7% year-on-year)". Figure 4 shows the number of countries around the world that have joined China's Belt and Road Initiatiative (BRI). As can be seen in the figure, China's BRI has attracted more than 140 countries. In Africa, the first countries that signed up for the BRI project were East and North African countries such as Kenya, Djibouti, Tanzania and Egypt. In Figure 5, the map shows the number of African countries that have signed up for the BRI since 2015. As can be seen in the figure, 52 countries in Africa had signed some BRI-related Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with China by 2022.

Table 1 shows that studies that analysed the China-Africa relationship focusing on their 'strategic partnership' are very few, given the voluminous literature on China and Africa. A search of Sino-Africa studies conducted in English with the term 'strategic partnership' in their titles produced only ten papers (see table). Furthermore, as the table shows, studies investigating the increased security cooperation in China-Africa relations conducted in English are rare, although this part of the debate has also produced numerous research publications. The column titled 'Focus of study' in Table 1 above shows that majority of these studies concentrated on analysing economic cooperation, while a few also included political relations between China and Africa. Also, the column titled 'Definition of strategic partnership' shows that, all these studies, except Akpan and Onya (2018), made no attempts to define the concept of strategic partnership. Figure 8 shows the countries around the world in which the United Nations (UN) has deployed its peacekeepers. As shown in the figure, the UN has deployed several peacekeeping missions around the world since the late 1940s, with most of these operations taking place in the African continent. Figure 9 focuses on the UN’s peacekeeping operations in Africa. As can be seen in the figure, Chinese peacekeeping troops were deployed in five out of the seven UN-led missions on the African continent as of 2019. Figure 12 shows the foreign military bases that currently exist in African countries. As the figure shows, the African Continent is a host to 47 known foreign military bases, of which 34 are United States (US) bases. Figure 13 shows the foreign military bases in Djibouti. As seen in the figure, Djibouti hosts the US' Camp Lemonnier military base, just 13.4 kilometres away from the Chinese PLA's new navy facility, along with military bases of other major powers such as France, Germany and Japan in close proximity. Djibouti thus found itself in the middle of diplomatic tensions between China and the US over fears of a Chinese takeover of the Doraleh Container Terminal, Djibouti's main container port, in 2018, as China financed the development of the port. Figure 6 shows China's Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) commitments from 2006 to 2021. As can be seen in the figure, China's financial pledges to assist Africa increased from US$5 billion to US$60 in 2015. However, they dropped to US$40 billion in 2021. Further, drops in the number of activities, such as official development assistance (ODAs) and capacity building, including reductions in security collaborations, were also noted. However, a new development was China's reallocation of US$10 billion of its Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) towards Africa from the US$40 billion that it received from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).