This repository includes data files and Stata and R scripts to replicate all original analysis from the paper and supplementary material (appendix).

This dataset does not contain any resources hosted on data.gov.au. It provides a link to the location of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Freedom of Information (FOI) disclosure log to aide in information and data discovery. You can find the FOI Disclosure log here and the Agency's Information Publication Scheme here.\r \r The data.gov.au team is not responsible for the contents of the above linked pages.

These are the qualitative data that I used for the article: Akande, Dapo and Milanovic, Marko (21 November 2015) “The constructive ambiguity of the Security Council ISIS resolution.” European Journal of International Law blog. Ambos, Kai (1999). Comment” on the articles by Bruno Simma, “Nato the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects” and Antonio Cassese “Ex Iniuria Ius Oritur”, available at http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol10/No1/coma.html. Bellamy, Alex (2006) Whither the Responsibility to Protect? Humanitarian Intervention and the 2005 World Summit. Ethics and International Affairs, 20 (2), pp. 143-169. Bevir, Mark, Daddow, Oliver, and Hall, Ian (2013) Introduction: Interpreting British Foreign Policy. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 15, pp. 163-174. Brockmeier, Sarah, et al (2016). The Impact of the Libyan Intervention Debates on Norm Protection. Global Society, 30(1), 113-133. Cantir, Cristian and Kaarbo, Juliet (eds.) (2016) Domestic Role Contestation, Foreign Policy, and International Relations, London, Routledge. Cantir, Cristian and Kaarbo, Juliet (January 2012) Contested roles and domestic politics: reflections on role theory in foreign policy analysis and IR theory. Foreign Policy Analysis 8(1), pp. 5-24. Chandler, David (2011) Libya: The End of Intervention. In The Responsibility to Protect: Challenges & Opportunities in Light of the Libyan Intervention. Bristol, E-International Relations, pp. 24-5. Checkel, Jeffrey, T. (1997) International Norms and Domestic Politics: Bridging the Rationalist-Constructivist Divide. European Journal of International Relations 3(4), pp. 473-95. Clegg, Nick et al. (29 August 2013) Why we must Act against Syria’s Chemical Weapons. Evening Standard. Daalder, Ivo and O’Hanlon, Michael (2000) Winning Ugly: NATO’s War to Save Kosovo. Washington, DC, Brookings Institution Press. Daddow, Oliver, Schnapper, Pauline (2013) Liberal Intervention in the Foreign Policy Thinking of Tony Blair and David Cameron. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 26(2), pp. 330-349. Dunne, Tim (1998) Inventing International Society: A History of the English School. London, Palgrave. Foot, Rosemary (May 2017) China and the International Human Protection Regime: Beliefs, Power, and Status in a Changing Normative Order. International Affairs (661), pp. 1-11. Gaskarth, Jamie (2014) Strategising Britain’s Role in the World. International Affairs, 90 (3), pp. 559-81. Gaskarth, Jamie (2016) Intervention, Domestic Contestation, and Britain’s National Role Conceptions. In Cantir, C. and Kaarbo, J., Domestic Role Contestation, Foreign Policy, and International Relations London, Routledge, pp. 105-121. George, Alexander and Bennett, Andrew (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MIT Press. Hagan, Joe D, et al. (2001) Foreign Policy by Coalition: Deadlock, Compromise, and Anarchy. International Studies Review, 3(2), 169-216. Glennon, J. Michael (1999). “The New Interventionism,” Foreign Affairs 78. Harnisch, Sebastian, Frank, Cornelia, and Maull, Hanns W. (2011) Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses. London: Routledge. Hazan, Reuven (2000). Intra-party Politics and Peacemaking in Democratic Societies: Israel’s Labor Party and the Middle East Peace Process, 1992-96. Journal of Peace Research, 37(3), 363-78. Heffernan, Richard (2005). Why the Prime Minister cannot be a President: Comparing Institutional Imperatives in Britain and America. Parliamentary Affairs, 58(1), 53-70. Hehir, Aidan (2010) Humanitarian Intervention: An Introduction. London, Palgrave. Hehir, A. (2011). The Illusion of Progress: Libya and the Future of R2P. In The Responsibility to Protect: Challenges & Opportunities in Light of the Libyan Intervention. Bristol, E-International Relations, pp. 18-9. Hoekema, Jan (2004). Srebrenica, Dutchbat, and the Role of the Netherlands’ Parliament. In Hans Born, Heiner Hanggi (eds.), The Double Democratic Deficit: Parliamentary Accountability and the Use of Force under International Auspices, London: Ashgate, 73-89. Holsti, Kalevi (1970) National role conceptions in the study of foreign policy. International Studies Quarterly 14 (3), pp. 233–309. Holzgrefe J.L (2003). The Humanitarian Intervention Debate.” In Humanitarian Intervention Ethical, Legal, and Political Dilemmas, edited by J.L. Holzgrefe and Robert O. Keohane, 15-52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Houghton, David, P (1996). The Role of Analogical Reasoning in Novel Foreign-Policy Situations. British Journal of Political Science, 26(4), 523-52. Jervis, Robert (1976) Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kaarbo, Juliet, Kenealy, Daniel (2017) Precedents, parliaments, and foreign policy: Historical Analogy in the House of Commons vote on Syria. West European Politics, pp. 62-79. Kaarbo, Juliet, Kenealy, Daniel (2015) No, Prime Minister: Explaining the House of Common’s Vote on Intervention in Syria. European Security, 1-22. Kaarbo, Juliet, Kenealy, Daniel (January 2014) The House of Common’s vote on British intervention in Syria. ISPI, Analysis 228. Kesgin, Baris, Kaarbo, Juliet (February 2010) When and how Parliaments influence Foreign Policy: The Case of Turkey’s Iraq Decision. International Studies Perspectives. 1 (11), pp. 19-36. Kettel, Steven (2013) Dilemmas of Discourse: Legitimising Britain’s War on Terror. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 15, pp. 263-79. Khong, Yuen, F (1992). Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965. Princeton: Princeton University Press. May, Ernest R. (1973). Lessons of the Past: The Use and Misuse of History in American Foreign Policy. New York: Oxford University Press. McCourt, David (2013) Embracing humanitarian intervention: Atlanticism and the UK interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 15 (2), pp. 246–62. Mello, Patrick A. (2017). Curbing the Royal Prerogative to use military force: The British House of Commons and the Conflicts in Libya and Syria. West European Politics, 40(1): 80-100. Neumann, Iver B. (2008) Discourse Analysis. In Klotz, Audrey and Prakash, Deepa (eds). Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide. London, Palgrave, pp. 61-77. Neustadt, Richard E., May, Ernest R. (1986). Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision-Makers. New York: Free Press. Peters, Dirk, Wagner, Wolfgang (2014). Executive Privilege or Parliamentary Proviso? Exploring the Sources of Parliamentary War Powers. Armed Forces and Society. 40(2): 310-331. Peterson, M. J (1997). The Use of Analogies in Developing Outer Space Law. International Organization, 51(2), 245-274. Ralph, Jason et. al. (December 2017) Before the vote: UK Foreign policy discourse on Syria 2011-2013. Review of International Studies. 43 (5), pp. 875-97. Rathbun, Brian C. (2004) Partisan Interventions European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Raunio, Tapio, Wagner, Wolfgang (2017) Towards Parliamentarisation of foreign and security policy? West European Politics 40(1), pp. 1-19. Reifler, Jason. et al. (2014) Prudence, principle and minimal heuristics: British public opinion toward the use of military force in Afghanistan and Libya. British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 16(1), pp. 28–55. Reiter, Dan, Tillman, Erik (2002). Public, Legislative, and Executive Constraints on the Democratic Initiation of Conflict. The Journal of Politics, 64(3), 810-26. Reus-Smit Christian (1999) The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity and Institutional Rationality in International Relations. Princeton, Princeton University Press. Risse, Thomas (Winter 2000) “Let’s Argue!” Communicative Action in World Politics, International Organization 54(1), pp. 1-39. Rose, Gideon (October 1998) Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Politics 51(1), pp. 144–72. Saideman, Stephen, Auerswald, David P (2012). Comparing Caveats: Understanding the Sources of National Restrictions upon NATO’s Mission in Afghanistan. International Studies Quarterly. 56, 67-84. Simma, Bruno (1999) NATO, the UN, and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects. European Journal of International Law (10), pp. 1-22; Strong, James (2015) Why Parliaments now decides on War: Tracing the Growth of the Parliamentary Prerogative through Syria, Libya, and Iraq. British Journal of Politics and International Relations (17), pp. 604-22. Wagner, Wolfgang, et al. (2018) Party Politics at the Water’s Edge: Contestation of Military Operations in Europe. European Political Science Review, 1-27. Weiss, Thomas G (2011) Whither R2P? In The Responsibility to Protect: Challenges & Opportunities in Light of the Libyan Intervention. Bristol, E-International Relations, pp. 7-11. Weiss, Thomas G (2014) After Syria: Whither R2P? In Murray, Robert W. and McKay Alasdair. Into the Eleventh Hour: R2P, Syria, and Humanitarianism in Crisis. Bristol, E-International Relations, pp. 34-7. Weiss, Thomas G (June 2004) The Sunset of Humanitarian Intervention? Responsibility to Protect in a Unipolar Era. Security Dialogue, 35 (2), pp. 135-53. Weller, Mark (25 November 2015) Permanent Imminence of Armed Attacks: Resolution 2249 (2015) and the Right to Self Defence against Designated Terrorist Groups. European Journal of International Law Blog.

The 2024-25 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. The 2024-25 Budget was tabled in the Parliament on Tuesday, 14 May 2024 (Budget night).\r \r This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2024-25 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X in machine readable format) – available \r after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) will be available (~8.30pm Budget night)\r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2024-25 Budget.\r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV: The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers (No.1) and (No.4) in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2024-25 Budget Measures\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses\r * Table 3.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2024-25 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table 1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1). Differences relate to:\r \r 1.\tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements\r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements and\r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts.\r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2023-24\r * 2024-25\r * 2025-26\r * 2026-27\r * 2027-28\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry\r * Attorney-General's\r * Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water\r * Defence\r * Education\r * Employment and Workplace Relations\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health and Aged Care\r * Home Affairs\r * Industry, Science and Resources\r * Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs (part of the Defence Portfolio)\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Tables of interest found in both Budget Paper No.1 Budget Strategy and Outlook and Budget Paper No.4 Agency Resourcing are included for reference as well.\r \r For the dataset for the 2023-24 Portfolio Supplementary Additional Estimates Statements, which were also tabled in the Parliament on Tuesday, 14 May 2024, please see the following page:\r https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/portfolio-supplementary-additional-estimates-statements-psaes-2024-25-tables-and-data

The 2023-24 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2023-24 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night).\r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2023-24 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV: The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers (No.1) and (No.4) in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2023-24 Budget Measures\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses\r * Table 3.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2023-24 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table 1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1). Differences relate to:\r \r 1. Intra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements\r 2. Entity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements and\r 3. Additional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts.\r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2022-23\r * 2023-24\r * 2024-25\r * 2025-26\r * 2026-27\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry\r * Attorney-General's\r * Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water\r * Defence\r * Education\r * Employment and Workplace Relations\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health and Aged Care\r * Home Affairs\r * Industry, Science and Resources\r * Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs (part of the Defence Portfolio)\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Tables of interest found in both Budget Paper No.1 Budget Strategy and Outlook and Budget Paper No.4 Agency Resourcing are included for reference as well.

The proposition that domestic political vulnerability provides an incentive for leaders to engage in international conflict has been widely accepted because of appealing logic and anecdotal support. Although empirical studies of U.S. behavior during the cold war era have demonstrated some support for a relationship between domestic political vulnerability and aggressive international behavior, the generalizability of these tests should not be assumed. In fact, there is little empirical evidence in support of this relationship as a general pattern. This study assesses theories linking domestic political vulnerability to international disputes on a cross-national basis by examining the relationships between economic decline, the electoral cycle, and measures of aggressive international action for 18 advanced industrialized democracies during the period from 1952 to 1988. The authors find no consistent support for a relationship between constraining domestic political conditions and international behavior. Instead, fewer international demands are made on politically vulnerable leaders. Due to strategic interaction in the international system, just when a state leader might be most willing to act aggressively, he or she is likely to have the least opportunity to do so. Variance in the behavior of international rivals may explain the lack of an empirical relationship between domestic political conditions and foreign policy behavior.

The October 2022-23 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2022-23 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night).\r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the October 2022-23 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV: The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in October Budget Papers Nos.1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2022-23 Budget Measures\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses\r * Table 3.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements. \r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘October 2022-23 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table 1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1). Differences relate to:\r \r 1. \tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements\r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements and\r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts.\r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2021-22\r * 2022-23\r * 2023-24\r * 2024-25\r * 2025-26\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry\r * Attorney-General's\r * Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water\r * Defence\r * Education\r * Employment and Workplace Relations\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health and Aged Care\r * Home Affairs\r * Industry, Science and Resources\r * Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs (part of the Defence Portfolio)\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Tables of interest found in both October Budget Paper No.1 Budget Strategy and Outlook and October Budget Paper No.4 Agency Resourcing are included for reference as well.\r

This dataset includes the replication code and supporting data files for the published piece in Foreign Policy Analysis, ID FPA-20-Nov-0237.R2, including the data, R script file, replication instructions, and a replication log.

This study is part of a time-series collection of national surveys fielded continuously since 1952. The American National Election Studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, enduring political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. This collection includes respondents who were first interviewed following the November 1990 general election (see AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1990: POST-ELECTION SURVEY [ICPSR VERSION] [ICPSR 9548]), and then reinterviewed in two subsequent surveys: AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY: 1990-1991 PANEL STUDY OF THE POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WAR/1991 PILOT STUDY ICPSR VERSION and AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1992: PRE- AND POST-ELECTION SURVEY ENHANCED WITH 1990 AND 1991 DATA. The purpose of this panel study is to trace the fortunes of the Bush presidency, from post-Gulf War height to November election defeat, and to provide insight into the origins of the Bill Clinton and Ross Perot coalitions. It also allows the panel analyst to do a traditional assessment of panel attrition which is not possible with any of the collections mentioned above. In 1990, respondents answered questions on topics such as presidential performance, the Persian Gulf War, values and individualism, and foreign relations. Post-election vote validation and election administration survey data are also included. In 1991, respondents were reinterviewed several months after hostilities in the Persian Gulf ended. The survey content consisted of a repeat of a subset of questions from the 1990 Post-Election Survey, and additional items especially relevant to the Gulf War. A number of contextual variables also are provided, including summary variables that combine the respondent's recall of his or her senator's and representative's vote on the use of force with that congressperson's actual vote. New pilot questions were also asked in areas such as gender, ethnicity, medical care for the elderly, and social altruism. In 1992, respondents were asked their positions on social issues such as altruism, abortion, the death penalty, prayer in the schools, the rights of homosexuals, sexual harassment, women's rights, and feminist consciousness. Other substantive themes included racial and ethnic stereotypes, opinions on school integration and affirmative action, attitudes towards immigrants (particularly Hispanics and Asians), opinions on immigration policy and bilingual education, assessments of United States foreign policy goals, and United States involvement in the Persian Gulf War. Part 2 provides information on the total number of cases included in the 1990 Post-Election Survey sample (1,980 respondents who were valid interviews and 805 selected respondents who were not interviewed) in order to study survey nonresponse. Variables include reasons for noninterview, the number of calls, and characteristics of the noninterviewed household.

The 2021-22 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2021-22 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r \r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night).\r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2021-22 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV: The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement;\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2021-22 Budget Measures;\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X;\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses;\r * Table 3.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements; and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2021-22 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table 1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1). Differences relate to:\r \r 1.\tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements;\r \r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements; and\r \r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts.\r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2020-21\r * 2021-22\r * 2022-23\r * 2023-24\r * 2024-25\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture, Water and the Environment\r * Attorney-General's\r * Defence\r * Education, Skills and Employment\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health\r * Home Affairs\r * Industry, Science, Energy and Resources\r * Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs (part of the Defence Portfolio)\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Tables of interest found in both Budget Paper No.1 Budget Strategy and Outlook and Budget Paper No.4 Agency Resourcing are included for reference as well.

This dataset includes the replication code and supporting data files for the accepted piece by Foreign Policy Analysis (Manuscript ID FPA-22-Jul-0118.R1), including the data, R script file, R script file in Word document format, R script file in PDF format, and a code book.

The 2017-18 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2017-18 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night). \r \r Data from the 2017-18 Budget is provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2017-18 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r

Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV\r

\r The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement;\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2017-18 Budget Measures;\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX;\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses;\r * Table 3.1.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements; and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2017-18 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1).\r \r Differences relate to:\r \r 1.\tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements;\r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements; and\r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts. \r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2016-17\r * 2017-18\r * 2018-19\r * 2019-20\r * 2020-2021\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture and Water Resources\r * Attorney-General's\r * Communication and the Arts\r * Defence\r * Education and Training\r * Employment\r * Environment and Energy\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health\r * Human Services\r * Immigration and Border Protection\r * Industry, Innovation and Science\r * Infrastructure and Regional Development\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Human Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r

Budget Paper Tables\r

The list below shows the data tables from the Budget Papers which are available in Excel and CSV formats.\r \r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.1 – Agency Resourcing\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.2 – Special Appropriations\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.3 – Special Accounts\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 2.2 – Staffing Tables\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 3.1 – Departmental Expenses\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 3.2 – Net Capital Investment\r \r Change Log\r \r 1.\t09:30 15/05/2017 Updated machine-readable CSV file for Program Expenditure Components where applicable. Agencies updated were Australian Taxation Office, Department of Education, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, Department of Social Services, Department of the Treasury and Department of Veterans’ Affairs

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The project examined attitudes to new forms of co-operation and integration between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus and the rest of Europe. All three countries are the immediate neighbours of the expanding Euro-Atlantic community, which, as a result of the first wave of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) enlargement in 1999, has already reached their western borders. Despite considerable disparities in their international influence, these countries find themselves 'outsiders' in the advancing process of European Union (EU) and NATO enlargement. A better understanding of the issues of co-operation and integration of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus and the rest of 'Europe' is essential in its turn if enlargement is not to lead to 'new dividing lines' across a continent that has only recently been reunited after the Cold War.

These and related issues are examined through a series of elite interviews, focus groups, mass surveys and printed sources (only the survey data are held at the UK Data Archive). Aims of the project included: studying perceptions of the present state of relations between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus and the EU and NATO; asking what material factors and perceptions have underlain the drive of the leaderships to improve their relations with both organisations; examining the forms of 'integration short of membership' that Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian policy communities envisage for their countries in the medium term; and whether current complications in bilateral relations (such as Chechnya or media freedom) are a function of short-term divergences in policy priorities or evidence of a more fundamental difference in normative principles. Finally, the project aimed to discover whether the policy instruments currently used by the EU and NATO to promote Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian convergence with European norms and practices are those that are best calculated to influence official policy in each of the three countries.

Main Topics:

The main topics covered include: economic, political and foreign policy; public attitudes in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.

The FTA Portal is an Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) initiative. The Portal enables users to explore how importers and exporters can benefit from Australia’s Free Trade Agreements.\r \r The API service of the FTA Portal provides third party organisations and systems access to the same data and functionality that enables the website. The API has been made available to encourage users to find new ways to use, display and share data relating to the Australia's Free Trade Agreements.\r \r We welcome queries about the FTA Portal API and feedback from interested parties to FTAportalfeedback@dfat.gov.au.

The 2018-19 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2018-19 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night). \r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2018-19 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV\r The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement;\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2018-19 Budget Measures;\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX;\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses;\r * Table 3.1.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements; and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2018-19 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1).\r Differences relate to:\r \r 1.\tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements;\r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements; and\r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts. \r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2017-18\r * 2018-19\r * 2019-20\r * 2020-21\r * 2021-22\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture and Water Resources Portfolio\r * Attorney-General’s Portfolio\r * Communications and the Arts Portfolio\r * Defence Portfolio\r * Defence Portfolio (Department of Veterans’ Affairs)\r * Education and Training Portfolio\r * Environment and Energy Portfolio\r * Finance Portfolio\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade Portfolio\r * Health Portfolio\r * Department of Human Services\r * Home Affairs Portfolio\r * Human Services\r * Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities Portfolio\r * Jobs and Innovation Portfolio (Department of Industry, Innovation and Science)\r * Jobs and Innovation Portfolio (Department of Jobs and Small Business)\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet Portfolio\r * Social Services Portfolio\r * Treasury Portfolio\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Budget Paper Tables\r The list below shows the data tables from the Budget Papers which are available in Excel and CSV formats.\r \r * Overview Glossy - Appendix C - Major Initiatives\r * Overview Glossy - Appendix D - Major Savings\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 3 - Table 6 - Reconciliation of underlying cash balance estimates\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 5 - Table 1 - Australian Government general government receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 5 - Table 7 - Australian Government general government (cash) receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 5 - Table 10 - Reconciliation of 2018-19 general government (accrual) revenue\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 5 - Online tables 1 to 4, Australian Government (accrual) revenue\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 6 - Table A1 - Estimates of expenses by function and sub-function\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 11 - Table 1 - Australian Government general government sector receipts payments net Future Fund earning and underlying cash balance\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 11 - Table 3 - Australian Government general government sector taxation receipts non taxation receipts and total receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 11 - Table 3 - Australian Government general government sector net debt and net interest payments\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.1 - Agency Resourcing\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.2 - Special Appropriations\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.3 - Special Accounts\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 2.2 - Staffing Tables\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 3.1 - Departmental Expenses\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 3.2 - Net Capital Investment\r \r A dedicated web-page has been created on data.gov.au for the 2017-18 Portfolio Supplementary Additional Estimates Statements (PSAES) dataset.

The 2016-17 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2016-17 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night). \r \r Data from the 2016-17 Budget is provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2016-17 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance and the Department of the Treasury.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV\r \r The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes. Only table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX is available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement;\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2016-17 Budget Measures;\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX;\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses;\r * Table 3.1.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements; and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2016-17 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1).\r \r Differences relate to:\r \r 1. Intra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements;\r 2. Entity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements; and\r 3. Additional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts. \r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2015-16\r * 2016-17\r * 2017-18\r * 2018-19\r * 2019-20\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The data transformation is expected to be complete by midday, 4 May 2016. The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture and Water Resources\r * Attorney-General's\r * Communication and the Arts\r * Defence\r * Education and Training\r * Employment\r * Environment\r * Finance\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade\r * Health\r * Human Services\r * Immigration and Border Protection\r * Industry and Science\r * Infrastructure and Regional Development\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet\r * Social Services\r * Human Services\r * Treasury\r * Veterans' Affairs\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Budget Paper Tables\r \r The list below shows the data tables from the Budget Papers which are available in Excel and CSV formats.\r \r * Budget Paper 1: Overview - Appendix C Major Intiatives\r * Budget Paper 1: Overview - Appendix D Major Savings\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 3 - Table 5: Reconciliation of underlying cash balance estimates\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 4 - Table 1: Australian Government general government receipts\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 4 - Table 7: Australian Government general government (cash) receipts\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 4 - Table 9: Reconciliation of 2015 16 general government (accrual) revenue\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 5 – Table 3: Estimates of expenses by function\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 10 - Table 1: Australian Government general government sector receipts, payments, net Future Fund earnings and underlying cash balance\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 10 - Table 3: Australian Government general government sector taxation receipts, non taxation receipts and total receipts\r * Budget Paper 1: Statement 10 - Table 4: Australian Government general government sector net debt and net interest payments\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.1 – Agency Resourcing\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.2 – Special Appropriations\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 1.3 – Special Accounts\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 2.2 – Staffing Tables\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 3.1 – Departmental Expenses\r * Budget Paper 4 Table 3.2 – Net Capital Investment\r \r Change Log\r \r 1. 03/05/2016 – datasets first published\r 2. 04/05/2016 – updated 2016-17 Line Items Dataset to include the Australian War Memorial, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Australian Research Council. Also added outcomes for the Federal Court and Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.\r 3. 04/05/2016 – updated 2016-17 Average Staffing Level to include the Australian Trade Commission, the Australian War Memorial, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Australian Research Council.\r 4. 04/05/2016 – updated 2016-17 Portfolio Budget Statement Tables to include the Australian War Memorial, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Australian Research Council. \r 5. 05/05/2016 – Update of Bureau of Meteorology, Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Clean Energy Regulator, Climate Change Authority and Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to a new version as provided by the Department of the Environment.\r 6. 20/05/2016 - Minor change to entity name.

The 2019-20 Budget is officially available at budget.gov.au as the authoritative source of Budget Papers (BPs) and Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) documents. This dataset is a collection of data sources from the 2019-20 Budget, including:\r \r * PBS Excel spreadsheets (including Table 2.X.1 Budgeted Expenses for OutcomeX in machine readable format) – available after PBSs are tabled in the Senate (~8.30pm Budget night); and\r * Selected tables from Budget Paper No. 4 (including in machine readable format) – available after the BPs are published on budget.gov.au (~7.30 pm Budget night).\r \r The data has been provided to assist those who wish to analyse and visualise key elements of the 2019-20 Budget.\r \r Data users should refer to footnotes and memoranda in the original files as these are not usually captured in machine readable CSVs.\r \r We welcome your feedback and comments below.\r \r This dataset was prepared by the Department of Finance.\r \r Information about the PBS Excel files and CSV:\r The PBS Excel files published should include the following financial tables with headings and footnotes, which are also are available in CSV. Much of the other data is also available in Budget Papers Nos. 1 and 4 in aggregate form:\r \r * Table 1.1: Entity Resource Statement;\r * Table 1.2: Entity 2018-19 Budget Measures;\r * Table 2.X.1: Budgeted Expenses for Outcome X;\r * Table 2.X.2: Program Component Expenses;\r * Table 3.1 to 3.6: Departmental Budgeted Financial Statements; and\r * Tables 3.7 to 3.11: Administered Budgeted Financial Statements.\r \r Please note, total expenses reported in the CSV file ‘2019-20 PBS line items dataset’ were prepared from individual entity program expense tables. Totalling these figures does not produce the total expense figure in ‘Table1: Estimates of General Government Expenses’ (Statement 6, Budget Paper 1). Differences relate to:\r \r 1.\tIntra entity charging for services which are eliminated for the reporting of general government financial statements;\r 2.\tEntity expenses that involve revaluation of assets and liabilities are reported as other economic flows in general government financial statements; and\r 3.\tAdditional entities’ expenses are included in general government sector expenses (e.g. Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited and other entities) noting that only entities that receive funding (either directly or via portfolio department through the annual appropriation acts.\r \r The original PBS Excel files and published documents include sub-totals and totals by entity and appropriation type which are not included in the line item CSV. These can be calculated programmatically. Where modifications are identified they will be updated as required.\r \r If a corrigendum to an entity’s PBS is issued after budget night, tables will be updated as necessary.\r \r \r The structure of the line item CSV is:\r \r * Portfolio\r * Department/Entity\r * Outcome\r * Program\r * Expense type\r * Appropriation type\r * Description\r * 2018-19\r * 2019-20\r * 2020-21\r * 2021-22\r * 2022-23\r * Source document\r * Source table\r * URL\r \r The following Portfolios are included in the line item CSV:\r \r * Agriculture and Water Resources Portfolio\r * Attorney-General’s Portfolio\r * Communications and the Arts Portfolio\r * Defence Portfolio\r * Defence Portfolio (Department of Veterans’ Affairs)\r * Education and Training Portfolio\r * Environment and Energy Portfolio\r * Finance Portfolio\r * Foreign Affairs and Trade Portfolio\r * Health Portfolio\r * Home Affairs Portfolio\r * Industry, Innovation and Science Portfolio\r * Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities Portfolio\r * Jobs and Small Business Portfolio\r * Prime Minister and Cabinet Portfolio\r * Social Services Portfolio\r * Social Services Portfolio (Department of Human Services)\r * Treasury Portfolio\r * Department of the House of Representatives\r * Department of the Senate\r * Department of Parliamentary Services\r * Parliamentary Budget Office\r \r Budget Paper Tables: The list below shows the data tables from the Budget Papers which are available in Excel and CSV formats.\r \r * Overview Glossy - Appendix C - Major Initiatives\r * Overview Glossy - Appendix D - Major Savings\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 3 - Table 7 - Reconciliation of underlying cash balance estimates\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 4 - Table 1 - Australian Government general government receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 4 - Table 7 - Australian Government general government (cash) receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 4 - Table 9 - Reconciliation of 2018-19 general government (accrual) revenue\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 5 - Table 3 - Estimates of expenses by function\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 10 - Table 1 - Australian Government general government sector receipts, payments, net Future Fund earning and underlying cash balance\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 10 - Table 3 - Government general government sector taxation receipts, non-taxation receipts and total receipts\r * Budget Paper 1 - Statement 10 - Table 4 - Australian Government general government sector net debt and net interest payments\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.1 - Agency Resourcing Table\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.2 - Special Appropriations Table (and summary)\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 1.3 - Special Accounts Table (and summary)\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 2.2 - Staffing by Agency\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 3.1 - Departmental Expenses Table\r * Budget Paper 4 - Table 3.2 - Net Capital Investment Table

The inflow of foreign R&D has brought vigor and vitality to the development of the high-tech industry (HTI). Using the panel data of HTI in 23 provinces (autonomous provinces and municipalities) in China from 2007 to 2016, this paper firstly calculates the Moran index of HTI’s innovation performance (IP), and finds a spatial agglomeration effect. After rigorous testing, we determine the most suitable spatial metering model. Finally, the spatial effect is further decomposed into three kinds of effects: direct effect, indirect effect, and total effect. This paper studies the impact of foreign research and development (R&D) on IP of HTI and its spatial spillover effects. According to the research, foreign R&D has a significant role in promoting IP of HTI in China, and has specific spatial spillover effects. Significantly, foreign R&D has substantial positive spillover effects of space. When IP of HTI is measured by product innovation, there is no obvious space overflow. However, panel regression showed a significant positive effect. In terms of the influence on product IP of HTI, foreign R&D plays an almost equal role as local R&D. In terms of the impact on technological IP of HTI, foreign R&D input plays a positive role. It has a spatial spillover effect, the degree of impact is lower than that of domestic R&D input. Local governments should formulate relevant policies to encourage the fluidity of technical knowledge and overcome the sticky problem of foreign R&D technical knowledge, which is an essential aspect of absorbing foreign R&D technical knowledge in the future.

This is the original data and R code for the "Politics Ex Cathedra" article in Research and Politics. The files replicate all the data arrangements and the analyses presented in the main paper as well as the supplemental appendix.