For a quick summary of the case study, please click "US Economy Powerpoint" and download the Powerpoint.

This dataset was inspired by rising prices for essential goods, the abnormally high inflation rate in March of 7.9 percent of this year, and the 30 trillion-dollar debt that we have. I was extremely curious to see how sustainable this is for the average American and if wages are increasing at the same rate to help combat this inflation. This is not politically driven in the slightest nor was this made to put the blame on Americans. This dataset was inspired by rising prices for essential goods and the abnormally high inflation rate in March of 7.9 percent of this year. I was extremely curious to see how sustainable this is for the average American and if wages are increasing at the same rate to help combat this inflation. This is not politically driven in the slightest nor was this made to put the blame on Americans. All of the datasets were obtained from third party sources websites such as https://dqydj.com/household-income-by-year/ and https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/ and only excluding https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ASPUS, which is first-party data.

This dataset was inspired by rising prices for essential goods and the abnormally high inflation rate in March of 7.9 percent of this year. I was extremely curious to see how sustainable this is for the average American and if wages are increasing at the same rate to help combat this inflation. This is not politically driven in the slightest nor was this made to put the blame on Americans. This dataset was inspired by rising prices for essential goods and the abnormally high inflation rate in March of 7.9 percent of this year. I was extremely curious to see how sustainable this is for the average American and if wages are increasing at the same rate to help combat this inflation. This is not politically driven in the slightest nor was this made to put the blame on Americans. All of the datasets were obtained from third party sources websites such as https://dqydj.com/household-income-by-year/ and https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/ and only excluding https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ASPUS, which is first-party data.

I labeled all of the datasets to be self-explanatory based off of the title of the datasets. The US Economy Notebook has most of the code that I used as well as the four of the six phases of data analysis. The last two phases are in the US Economy Powerpoint. The "US Historical Inflation Rates" dataset could have also been labeled "The Inflation Of The US Dollar Month By Month". Lastly, the Average Sales of Houses in Jan is just a filtered version of "Average Sales of Houses in the US" dataset.

View economic output, reported as the nominal value of all new goods and services produced by labor and property located in the U.S.

Description

Subscriptions to economics journals at US libraries, for the year 2000.

Usage

data("Journals")

Format

A data frame containing 180 observations on 10 variables.

title

Journal title.

publisher

factor with publisher name.

society

factor. Is the journal published by a scholarly society?

price

Library subscription price.

pages

Number of pages.

charpp

Characters per page.

citations

Total number of citations.

foundingyear

Year journal was founded.

subs

Number of library subscriptions.

field

factor with field description.

Details

Data on 180 economic journals, collected in particular for analyzing journal pricing. See also https://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Journals/jpricing.html for general information on this topic as well as a more up-to-date version of the data set. This version is taken from Stock and Watson (2007).

The data as obtained from the online complements for Stock and Watson (2007) contained two journals with title “World Development”. One of these (observation 80) seemed to be an error and was changed to “The World Economy”.

Source

Online complements to Stock and Watson (2007).

References

Bergstrom, T. (2001). Free Labor for Costly Journals? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, 183–198.

Stock, J.H. and Watson, M.W. (2007). Introduction to Econometrics, 2nd ed. Boston: Addison Wesley.

Examples

data and transformed variables

data("Journals") journals <- Journals[, c("subs", "price")] journals$citeprice <- Journals$price/Journals$citations journals$age <- 2000 - Journals$foundingyear journals$chars <- Journals$charpp*Journals$pages/10^6

Stock and Watson (2007)

Figure 8.9 (a) and (b)

plot(subs ~ citeprice, data = journals, pch = 19) plot(log(subs) ~ log(citeprice), data = journals, pch = 19) fm1 <- lm(log(subs) ~ log(citeprice), data = journals) abline(fm1)

Table 8.2, use HC1 for comparability with Stata

fm2 <- lm(subs ~ citeprice + age + chars, data = log(journals)) fm3 <- lm(subs ~ citeprice + I(citeprice^2) + I(citeprice^3) + age + I(age * citeprice) + chars, data = log(journals)) fm4 <- lm(subs ~ citeprice + age + I(age * citeprice) + chars, data = log(journals)) coeftest(fm1, vcov = vcovHC(fm1, type = "HC1")) coeftest(fm2, vcov = vcovHC(fm2, type = "HC1")) coeftest(fm3, vcov = vcovHC(fm3, type = "HC1")) coeftest(fm4, vcov = vcovHC(fm4, type = "HC1")) waldtest(fm3, fm4, vcov = vcovHC(fm3, type = "HC1"))

changes with respect to age

library("strucchange")

Nyblom-Hansen test

scus <- gefp(subs ~ citeprice, data = log(journals), fit = lm, order.by = ~ age) plot(scus, functional = meanL2BB)

estimate breakpoint(s)

journals <- journals[order(journals$age),] bp <- breakpoints(subs ~ citeprice, data = log(journals), h = 20) plot(bp) bp.age <- journals$age[bp$breakpoints]

visualization

plot(subs ~ citeprice, data = log(journals), pch = 19, col = (age > log(bp.age)) + 1) abline(coef(bp)[1,], col = 1) abline(coef(bp)[2,], col = 2) legend("bottomleft", legend = c("age > 18", "age < 18"), lty = 1, col = 2:1, bty = "n")

Data was collected from the FRED website.

Contains economic indicators often associated with recessions along with recession status data. Data collected on smallest time unit and earliest time date available for each indicator which results in many nulls but increased flexibility for the users of this dataset.

• recession: "1" recessionary period, "0" non-recessionary period (Monthly)
• cpi: CPI (1982-1984=INDEX 100) (Monthly)
• gdp: Real GDP Billions of Chained 2017 Dollars (Quarterly)
• unemployment: Unemployment Rate (Monthly)
• m2: M2 Billions of Dollars (Monthly)
• fed_funds: Federal Funds Rate (Monthly)
• ten_two: 10-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Minus 2-Year Treasury Constant Maturity (Monthly)
• residential: Real Residential Property Price Rate (Quarterly)

Comprehensive description of each variable can be found at https://fred.stlouisfed.org/

The Economic Indicator Service (EIS) aims to deliver economic content to financial institutions on both buy and sell-side and service providers. This new service currently covers 34,351 recurring macro-economic indicators from 135 countries ( as of December 16, 2019 ) such as GDP data, unemployment releases, PMI numbers etc.

Economic Indicator Service gathers the major economic events from a variety of regions and countries around the globe and provides an Economic Events Data feed and Economic Calendar service to our clients. This service includes all previous historic data on economic indicators that are currently available on the database.

Depending on availability, information regarding economic indicators, including the details of the issuing agency as well as historical data series can be made accessible for the client. Key information about EIS: • Cloud-based service for Live Calendar – delivered via HTML/JavaScript application formats, which can then be embedded onto any website using iFrames • Alternatives methods available – such as API and JSON feed for the economic calendar that can be integrated into the company’s system • Live data – updated 24/5, immediately after the data has been released • Historical data – includes a feed of all previous economic indicators available We are currently adding additional indicators/countries from Africa as well as expanding our coverage of Indicators in G20. The calendar includes the following. • Recurring & Non-recurring indicators covering 136 countries across 21 regions. • Indicators showing high, medium, and low impact data. • Indicators showing actual, previous, and forecast data. • Indicators can be filtered across 16 subtypes. • News generation for selected high-impact data. • Indicator description and historical data up to the latest eight historical points with a chart.

The U.S. Counties With the Highest GDP

How Much They Contribute to the National Economy

By Charlie Hutcheson [source]

About this dataset

This dataset contains data on the GDP of counties in the United States. The data is from the BEA.gov website and is for the year 2019. The columns in the dataset are: County FIPS, Region, SUB_REGION, State, STATE_ABBR, County Full Name, and GDP (Chained $)

How to use the dataset

The U.S. Counties With the Highest Economic Output is a dataset that contains data on the GDP of counties in the United States. This data can be used to determine which counties have the highest economic output and to compare the economic output of different counties

Research Ideas

-To see how the GDP affects the economy -To see how different states are doing in terms of GDP -To compare counties in different states

Acknowledgements

Data Source

License

License: Dataset copyright by authors - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. - Keep intact - all notices that refer to this license, including copyright notices.

Columns

File: GDP by County.csv | Column name | Description | |:---------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Year | The year the data was collected. (Integer) | | County FIPS | The FIPS code for the county. (String) | | Region | The region the county is in. (String) | | SUB_REGION | The subregion the county is in. (String) | | State | The state the county is in. (String) | | STATE_ABBR | The two-letter abbreviation for the state the county is in. (String) | | County Full Name | The full name of the county. (String) | | GDP (Chained $) | The GDP of the county in chained dollars. (Float) |

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit Charlie Hutcheson.

Inflation Rate in the United States increased to 3 percent in September from 2.90 percent in August of 2025. This dataset provides - United States Inflation Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

The Anthropic Economic Index

  Overview

The Anthropic Economic Index provides insights into how AI is being incorporated into real-world tasks across the modern economy.

  Data Releases

This repository contains multiple data releases, each with its own documentation:

2025-09-15 Release: Updated analysis with geographic and first-party API data using Sonnet 4 2025-03-27 Release: Updated analysis with Claude 3.7 Sonnet data and cluster-level insights 2025-02-10… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Anthropic/EconomicIndex.

Context

This dataset is created as part of Opportunity Insights' Economic Tracker, which you can access directly (and with a very nice user interface) at https://www.tracktherecovery.org. The objective of this data is to allow everyone to track the state of the US economy in "real time" - in other words, the data is made available almost as soon as it comes in, and thus there is very little lag between the dataset and the current date. Another interesting feature is that the dataset is very granular, meaning that it can inform you about the economy even at the county or city level, and in some cases with breakdowns by economic sector or by income bracket.

Content

In short, the data originates from big companies that offer payments services, or job web portals, etc - these companies share their usage data with Opportunity Insight (in a way that protects user privacy, as you can read in detail in OI's website) and they, in turn, match that data with what would correspond to official statistics. Thus, the dataset can be reasonably interpreted as being a sort of tracker for the economy, even though OI does not tap from the same multitude of sources like the official statistical agencies. Further information about the content, including the specific files, can be found at the README page below.

Acknowledgements

This dataset is fully attributed to Opportunity Insights, and it is their complete merit. If you use it, please make sure to cite it adequately, by pointing to their website (as above) and to the following paper: "How Did COVID-19 and Stabilization Policies Affect Spending and Employment? A New Real-Time Economic Tracker Based on Private Sector Data", by Raj Chetty, John Friedman, Nathaniel Hendren, Michael Stepner, and the Opportunity Insights Team. June 2020. Available at: https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/tracker_paper.pdf

This web site includes statistics on poverty and other distributional and social variables from 25 Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries. All statistics are computed from microdata of the main household surveys carried out in these countries using a homogenous methodology (data permitting). SEDLAC allows users to monitor the trends in poverty and other distributional and social indicators in the region. The database is available in the form of brief reports, charts and electronic Excel tables with information for each country/year. In addition, the website visitor can carry out dynamic searches online.

These data represent an update to the dataset, "State IO Two-Region Economic Input-Output Models for 50 U.S. States 2012-2017" based on the methods described by Li et al. (2022). They are an update to that dataset published with an expanded time series. These models were produced with the stateior R package, v0.4.0. Excel files (50 in total) are provided for two region (State of Interest and Rest of U.S.) Make and Use tables for each U.S. State IO model for years 2012-2023. Additional data files supporting this release including all intermediate and final products in native R format (.RDS) and can be opened directly in R software or through the stateior package. See the stateior github page for more details. https://dmap-data-commons-ord.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html#stateio/ All values are in current dollar years (e.g "Make 2012" is the Make table in 2012 USD in a given model). For a description of the methods used and survey of results see the Addendum 1 on the EPA Science Inventory page for the original publication. Please cite this dataset as: Young, Ben, Julie Chen, Jorge Vendries, and Wesley Ingwersen. 2025. “StateIO v0.4.0 Two-Region Economic Input-Output Models for 50 U.S. States: 2012-2023.” Data.gov. https://doi.org/10.23719/1532211. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Li, M., J. Ferreira, C.D. Court, D. Meyer, M. Li, and W.W. Ingwersen. StateIO - Open Source Economic Input-Output Models for the 50 States of the United States of America. International Regional Science Review. SAGE Publications, THOUSAND OAKS, CA, USA, 46(4): 428-481, (2023).

Overview

The Associated Press is sharing data from the COVID Impact Survey, which provides statistics about physical health, mental health, economic security and social dynamics related to the coronavirus pandemic in the United States.

Conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for the Data Foundation, the probability-based survey provides estimates for the United States as a whole, as well as in 10 states (California, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New York, Oregon and Texas) and eight metropolitan areas (Atlanta, Baltimore, Birmingham, Chicago, Cleveland, Columbus, Phoenix and Pittsburgh).

The survey is designed to allow for an ongoing gauge of public perception, health and economic status to see what is shifting during the pandemic. When multiple sets of data are available, it will allow for the tracking of how issues ranging from COVID-19 symptoms to economic status change over time.

The survey is focused on three core areas of research:

• Physical Health: Symptoms related to COVID-19, relevant existing conditions and health insurance coverage.
• Economic and Financial Health: Employment, food security, and government cash assistance.
• Social and Mental Health: Communication with friends and family, anxiety and volunteerism. (Questions based on those used on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.) ## Using this Data - IMPORTANT This is survey data and must be properly weighted during analysis: DO NOT REPORT THIS DATA AS RAW OR AGGREGATE NUMBERS!!

Instead, use our queries linked below or statistical software such as R or SPSS to weight the data.

Queries

If you'd like to create a table to see how people nationally or in your state or city feel about a topic in the survey, use the survey questionnaire and codebook to match a question (the variable label) to a variable name. For instance, "How often have you felt lonely in the past 7 days?" is variable "soc5c".

Nationally: Go to this query and enter soc5c as the variable. Hit the blue Run Query button in the upper right hand corner.

Local or State: To find figures for that response in a specific state, go to this query and type in a state name and soc5c as the variable, and then hit the blue Run Query button in the upper right hand corner.

The resulting sentence you could write out of these queries is: "People in some states are less likely to report loneliness than others. For example, 66% of Louisianans report feeling lonely on none of the last seven days, compared with 52% of Californians. Nationally, 60% of people said they hadn't felt lonely."

Margin of Error

The margin of error for the national and regional surveys is found in the attached methods statement. You will need the margin of error to determine if the comparisons are statistically significant. If the difference is:

• At least twice the margin of error, you can report there is a clear difference.
• At least as large as the margin of error, you can report there is a slight or apparent difference.
• Less than or equal to the margin of error, you can report that the respondents are divided or there is no difference. ## A Note on Timing Survey results will generally be posted under embargo on Tuesday evenings. The data is available for release at 1 p.m. ET Thursdays.

About the Data

The survey data will be provided under embargo in both comma-delimited and statistical formats.

Each set of survey data will be numbered and have the date the embargo lifts in front of it in the format of: 01_April_30_covid_impact_survey. The survey has been organized by the Data Foundation, a non-profit non-partisan think tank, and is sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and the Packard Foundation. It is conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago, a non-partisan research organization. (NORC is not an abbreviation, it part of the organization's formal name.)

Data for the national estimates are collected using the AmeriSpeak Panel, NORC’s probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. household population. Interviews are conducted with adults age 18 and over representing the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Panel members are randomly drawn from AmeriSpeak with a target of achieving 2,000 interviews in each survey. Invited panel members may complete the survey online or by telephone with an NORC telephone interviewer.

Once all the study data have been made final, an iterative raking process is used to adjust for any survey nonresponse as well as any noncoverage or under and oversampling resulting from the study specific sample design. Raking variables include age, gender, census division, race/ethnicity, education, and county groupings based on county level counts of the number of COVID-19 deaths. Demographic weighting variables were obtained from the 2020 Current Population Survey. The count of COVID-19 deaths by county was obtained from USA Facts. The weighted data reflect the U.S. population of adults age 18 and over.

Data for the regional estimates are collected using a multi-mode address-based (ABS) approach that allows residents of each area to complete the interview via web or with an NORC telephone interviewer. All sampled households are mailed a postcard inviting them to complete the survey either online using a unique PIN or via telephone by calling a toll-free number. Interviews are conducted with adults age 18 and over with a target of achieving 400 interviews in each region in each survey.Additional details on the survey methodology and the survey questionnaire are attached below or can be found at https://www.covid-impact.org.

Attribution

Results should be credited to the COVID Impact Survey, conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for the Data Foundation.

AP Data Distributions

​To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

United States US: Women Business and the Law Index Score: scale 1-100 data was reported at 91.250 NA in 2023. This stayed constant from the previous number of 91.250 NA for 2022. United States US: Women Business and the Law Index Score: scale 1-100 data is updated yearly, averaging 83.750 NA from Dec 1970 (Median) to 2023, with 54 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 91.250 NA in 2023 and a record low of 66.875 NA in 1974. United States US: Women Business and the Law Index Score: scale 1-100 data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. The index measures how laws and regulations affect women’s economic opportunity. Overall scores are calculated by taking the average score of each index (Mobility, Workplace, Pay, Marriage, Parenthood, Entrepreneurship, Assets and Pension), with 100 representing the highest possible score.;World Bank: Women, Business and the Law. https://wbl.worldbank.org/;;1. For the reference period, WDI and Gender Databases take the data coverage years instead of reporting years used in WBL (https://wbl.worldbank.org/). For example, the data for YR2020 in WBL (report year) corresponds to data for YR2019 in WDI and Gender Databases. 2. The 2024 Women, Business and the Law (WBL) report has introduced two distinct datasets, labeled as 1.0 and 2.0. The WBL data in the Gender database is based on the dataset 1.0. This dataset maintains consistency with the indicators used in previous WBL reports from 2020 to 2023. In contrast, the WBL 2.0 dataset includes new areas of childcare and safety. For those interested in exploring the WBL 2.0 dataset, it is available on the WBL website at https://wbl.worldbank.org.

Very Important

• Check out the new must-see kernel for this dataset Click Here
• Make Sure to upvote for more datasets and kernel :D

Overview:

Explore the dataset and potentially gain valuable insight into your data science project through interesting features. The dataset was developed for a portfolio optimization graduate project I was working on. The goal was to the monetize risk of company deleveraging by associated with changes in economic data. Applications of the dataset may include. To see the data in action visit my analytics page. Analytics Page & Dashboard and to access all 295,000+ records click here.

• Mortgage-Backed Securities
• Geographic Business Investment
• Real Estate Analysis

For any questions, you may reach us at research_development@goldenoakresearch.com. For immediate assistance, you may reach me on at 585-626-2965. Please Note: the number is my personal number and email is preferred

Statistical Themes:

Note: in total there are 75 fields the following are just themes the fields fall under Home Owner Costs: Sum of utilities, property taxes.

• Second Mortgage: Households with a second mortgage statistics.
• Home Equity Loan: Households with a Home equity Loan statistics.
• Debt: Households with any type of debt statistics.
• Mortgage Costs: Statistics regarding mortgage payments, home equity loans, utilities and property taxes
• Home Owner Costs: Sum of utilities, property taxes statistics
• Gross Rent: Contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utility features
• Gross Rent as Percent of Income Gross rent as the percent of income very interesting
• High school Graduation: High school graduation statistics.
• Population Demographics: Population demographic statistics.
• Age Demographics: Age demographic statistics.
• Household Income: Total income of people residing in the household.
• Family Income: Total income of people related to the householder.

Sources, if you wish to get the data your self :)

2012-2016 ACS 5-Year Documentation was provided by the U.S. Census Reports. Retrieved May 2, 2018, from

• Census estimate, error, and location data
• Census location information

Access All 325,258 Location of Our Most Complete Database Ever:

Providing you the potential to monetize risk and optimize your investment portfolio through quality economic features at unbeatable price. Access all 295,000+ records on an incredibly small scale, see links below for more details:

• Full Dataset: View Full Dataset
• Real Estate Research: View Research

The O*NET Database contains hundreds of standardized and occupation-specific descriptors on almost 1,000 occupations covering the entire U.S. economy. The database, which is available to the public at no cost, is continually updated by a multi-method data collection program. Sources of data include: job incumbents, occupational experts, occupational analysts, employer job postings, and customer/professional association input.

Data content areas include:

• Worker Characteristics (e.g., Abilities, Interests, Work Styles)
• Worker Requirements (e.g., Education, Knowledge, Skills)
• Experience Requirements (e.g., On-the-Job Training, Work Experience)
• Occupational Requirements (e.g., Detailed Work Activities, Work Context)
• Occupation-Specific Information (e.g., Job Titles, Tasks, Technology Skills)

Abstract

The Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) Complete Count Data include more than 650 million individual-level and 7.5 million household-level records. The microdata are the result of collaboration between IPUMS and the nation’s two largest genealogical organizations—Ancestry.com and FamilySearch—and provides the largest and richest source of individual level and household data.

Before Manuscript Submission

All manuscripts (and other items you'd like to publish) must be submitted to

phsdatacore@stanford.edu for approval prior to journal submission.

We will check your cell sizes and citations.

For more information about how to cite PHS and PHS datasets, please visit:

https:/phsdocs.developerhub.io/need-help/citing-phs-data-core

Documentation

Historic data are scarce and often only exists in aggregate tables. The key advantage of historic US census data is the availability of individual and household level characteristics that researchers can tabulate in ways that benefits their specific research questions. The data contain demographic variables, economic variables, migration variables and family variables. Within households, it is possible to create relational data as all relations between household members are known. For example, having data on the mother and her children in a household enables researchers to calculate the mother’s age at birth. Another advantage of the Complete Count data is the possibility to follow individuals over time using a historical identifier.

In sum: the historic US census data are a unique source for research on social and economic change and can provide population health researchers with information about social and economic determinants.

The historic US 1920 census data was collected in January 1920. Enumerators collected data traveling to households and counting the residents who regularly slept at the household. Individuals lacking permanent housing were counted as residents of the place where they were when the data was collected. Household members absent on the day of data collected were either listed to the household with the help of other household members or were scheduled for the last census subdivision.

Notes

• We provide household and person data separately so that it is convenient to explore the descriptive statistics on each level. In order to obtain a full dataset, merge the household and person on the variables SERIAL and SERIALP. In order to create a longitudinal dataset, merge datasets on the variable HISTID.

• Households with more than 60 people in the original data were broken up for processing purposes. Every person in the large households are considered to be in their own household. The original large households can be identified using the variable SPLIT, reconstructed using the variable SPLITHID, and the original count is found in the variable SPLITNUM.

• Coded variables derived from string variables are still in progress. These variables include: occupation and industry.

• Missing observations have been allocated and some inconsistencies have been edited for the following variables: SPEAKENG, YRIMMIG, CITIZEN, AGE, BPL, MBPL, FBPL, LIT, SCHOOL, OWNERSHP, MORTGAGE, FARM, CLASSWKR, OCC1950, IND1950, MARST, RACE, SEX, RELATE, MTONGUE. The flag variables indicating an allocated observation for the associated variables can be included in your extract by clicking the ‘Select data quality flags’ box on the extract summary page.

• Most inconsistent information was not edited for this release, thus there are observations outside of the universe for some variables. In particular, the variables GQ, and GQTYPE have known inconsistencies and will be improved with the next release.

%3C!-- --%3E

Section 2

This dataset was created on 2020-01-10 18:46:34.647 by merging multiple datasets together. The source datasets for this version were:

IPUMS 1920 households: This dataset includes all households from the 1920 US census.

IPUMS 1920 persons: This dataset includes all individuals from the 1920 US census.

IPUMS 1920 Lookup: This dataset includes variable names, variable labels, variable values, and corresponding variable value labels for the IPUMS 1920 datasets.

This dataset contains Supplemental Data at the county level from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food Environment Atlas website. ERS (Economic Research Service, USDA) researchers and others who analyze conditions in "rural" America most often study conditions in nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) areas, defined on the basis of counties. Counties are the standard building block for collecting economic data and for conducting research to track and explain regional population and economic trends.

Data was last updated on the USDA website in September 2020.

Any data elements with numerical values reflect figures at the locality-level. See column descriptions for details. For more information on all metrics in this dataset, see the Food Environment Atlas Data Access and Documentation Downloads website.

United States agricultural researchers have many options for making their data available online. This dataset aggregates the primary sources of ag-related data and determines where researchers are likely to deposit their agricultural data. These data serve as both a current landscape analysis and also as a baseline for future studies of ag research data. Purpose As sources of agricultural data become more numerous and disparate, and collaboration and open data become more expected if not required, this research provides a landscape inventory of online sources of open agricultural data. An inventory of current agricultural data sharing options will help assess how the Ag Data Commons, a platform for USDA-funded data cataloging and publication, can best support data-intensive and multi-disciplinary research. It will also help agricultural librarians assist their researchers in data management and publication. The goals of this study were to establish where agricultural researchers in the United States-- land grant and USDA researchers, primarily ARS, NRCS, USFS and other agencies -- currently publish their data, including general research data repositories, domain-specific databases, and the top journals compare how much data is in institutional vs. domain-specific vs. federal platforms determine which repositories are recommended by top journals that require or recommend the publication of supporting data ascertain where researchers not affiliated with funding or initiatives possessing a designated open data repository can publish data Approach The National Agricultural Library team focused on Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and United States Forest Service (USFS) style research data, rather than ag economics, statistics, and social sciences data. To find domain-specific, general, institutional, and federal agency repositories and databases that are open to US research submissions and have some amount of ag data, resources including re3data, libguides, and ARS lists were analysed. Primarily environmental or public health databases were not included, but places where ag grantees would publish data were considered. Search methods We first compiled a list of known domain specific USDA / ARS datasets / databases that are represented in the Ag Data Commons, including ARS Image Gallery, ARS Nutrition Databases (sub-components), SoyBase, PeanutBase, National Fungus Collection, i5K Workspace @ NAL, and GRIN. We then searched using search engines such as Bing and Google for non-USDA / federal ag databases, using Boolean variations of “agricultural data” /“ag data” / “scientific data” + NOT + USDA (to filter out the federal / USDA results). Most of these results were domain specific, though some contained a mix of data subjects. We then used search engines such as Bing and Google to find top agricultural university repositories using variations of “agriculture”, “ag data” and “university” to find schools with agriculture programs. Using that list of universities, we searched each university web site to see if their institution had a repository for their unique, independent research data if not apparent in the initial web browser search. We found both ag specific university repositories and general university repositories that housed a portion of agricultural data. Ag specific university repositories are included in the list of domain-specific repositories. Results included Columbia University – International Research Institute for Climate and Society, UC Davis – Cover Crops Database, etc. If a general university repository existed, we determined whether that repository could filter to include only data results after our chosen ag search terms were applied. General university databases that contain ag data included Colorado State University Digital Collections, University of Michigan ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research), and University of Minnesota DRUM (Digital Repository of the University of Minnesota). We then split out NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) repositories. Next we searched the internet for open general data repositories using a variety of search engines, and repositories containing a mix of data, journals, books, and other types of records were tested to determine whether that repository could filter for data results after search terms were applied. General subject data repositories include Figshare, Open Science Framework, PANGEA, Protein Data Bank, and Zenodo. Finally, we compared scholarly journal suggestions for data repositories against our list to fill in any missing repositories that might contain agricultural data. Extensive lists of journals were compiled, in which USDA published in 2012 and 2016, combining search results in ARIS, Scopus, and the Forest Service's TreeSearch, plus the USDA web sites Economic Research Service (ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Rural Development (RD), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The top 50 journals' author instructions were consulted to see if they (a) ask or require submitters to provide supplemental data, or (b) require submitters to submit data to open repositories. Data are provided for Journals based on a 2012 and 2016 study of where USDA employees publish their research studies, ranked by number of articles, including 2015/2016 Impact Factor, Author guidelines, Supplemental Data?, Supplemental Data reviewed?, Open Data (Supplemental or in Repository) Required? and Recommended data repositories, as provided in the online author guidelines for each the top 50 journals. Evaluation We ran a series of searches on all resulting general subject databases with the designated search terms. From the results, we noted the total number of datasets in the repository, type of resource searched (datasets, data, images, components, etc.), percentage of the total database that each term comprised, any dataset with a search term that comprised at least 1% and 5% of the total collection, and any search term that returned greater than 100 and greater than 500 results. We compared domain-specific databases and repositories based on parent organization, type of institution, and whether data submissions were dependent on conditions such as funding or affiliation of some kind. Results A summary of the major findings from our data review: Over half of the top 50 ag-related journals from our profile require or encourage open data for their published authors. There are few general repositories that are both large AND contain a significant portion of ag data in their collection. GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), ICPSR, and ORNL DAAC were among those that had over 500 datasets returned with at least one ag search term and had that result comprise at least 5% of the total collection. Not even one quarter of the domain-specific repositories and datasets reviewed allow open submission by any researcher regardless of funding or affiliation. See included README file for descriptions of each individual data file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Journals. File Name: Journals.csvResource Title: Journals - Recommended repositories. File Name: Repos_from_journals.csvResource Title: TDWG presentation. File Name: TDWG_Presentation.pptxResource Title: Domain Specific ag data sources. File Name: domain_specific_ag_databases.csvResource Title: Data Dictionary for Ag Data Repository Inventory. File Name: Ag_Data_Repo_DD.csvResource Title: General repositories containing ag data. File Name: general_repos_1.csvResource Title: README and file inventory. File Name: README_InventoryPublicDBandREepAgData.txt

The global number of Facebook users was forecast to continuously increase between 2023 and 2027 by in total 391 million users (+14.36 percent). After the fourth consecutive increasing year, the Facebook user base is estimated to reach 3.1 billion users and therefore a new peak in 2027. Notably, the number of Facebook users was continuously increasing over the past years. User figures, shown here regarding the platform Facebook, have been estimated by taking into account company filings or press material, secondary research, app downloads and traffic data. They refer to the average monthly active users over the period and count multiple accounts by persons only once.The shown data are an excerpt of Statista's Key Market Indicators (KMI). The KMI are a collection of primary and secondary indicators on the macro-economic, demographic and technological environment in up to 150 countries and regions worldwide. All indicators are sourced from international and national statistical offices, trade associations and the trade press and they are processed to generate comparable data sets (see supplementary notes under details for more information).

Recommended citation

Article citation will be added once the article is available.

Content

• Use of the dataset and full description
• Abstract
• Support
• Files included in the dataset
• Notes
• Data format description (columns)
• Data sources
• Changelog
• References

Use of the dataset and full description

Before using the dataset, please read this document and the article describing the methodology, especially the "Discussion and limitations" section.

The article will be referenced here as soon as it is published.

Please notify us (johannes.guetschow@pik-potsdam.de) if you use the dataset so that we can keep track of how it is used and take that into consideration when updating and improving the dataset.

When using this dataset or one of its updates, please cite the DOI of the precise version of the dataset used and also the data description article which this dataset is supplement to (see above). Please consider also citing the relevant original sources when using the RCP-SSP-dwn dataset. See the full citations in the References section further below.

Support

If you encounter possible errors or other things that should be noted or need support in using the dataset or have any other questions regarding the dataset, please contact johannes.guetschow@pik-potsdam.de.

Abstract

This dataset provides country scenarios, downscaled from the RCP (Representative Concentration Pathways) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathways) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (Gross Domestic Product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process harmonized to and combined with up to date historical data.

Files included in the dataset

The repository comprises several datasets. Each dataset comes in a csv file. The file name is constructed from dataset properties as follows:

The "Source" flag indicates which input scenarios were used.

• PMRCP: RCP scenarios downscaled using the SSPs: emissions and socio-economic data; scenarios are available both harmonized to historical data and non-harmonized.
• PMSSP: Downscaled SSP IAM scenarios: emissions and socio-economic data; scenarios are available both harmonized to historical data and non-harmonized.

the "Bunkers" flag indicates if the input emissions scenarios have been corrected for emissions from international shipping and aviation (bunkers) before downscaling to country level or not. The flag is "B" for scenarios where emissions from bunkers have been removed before downscaling and "" (no flag) where they have not been removed.

The "Downscaling" flag indicates the downscaling technique used.

• IE: Convergence downscaling with exponential convergence of emissions intensities and convergence before transition to negative emissions.
• IC: Regional emission intensity growth rates for all countries.
• CS: Constant emission shares as a reference case independent of the socio-economic scenario.

All files contain data for all countries and variables. For detailed methodology descriptions we refer to the paper this dataset is a supplement to. A reference to the paper will be added as soon as it is published.

Finally the data description including detailed references is included: RCP-SSP-dwn_v1.0_data_description.pdf.

Notes

If you encounter problems with the size of the csv files please let us know, so we can find solutions for future releases of the data.

Data format description (columns)

"source"

For PMRCP files source values are

• RCPSSP
• PMRCP
• PMRCPMISC

For PMSSP files source values are

• SSPIAM
• PMSSP
• PMSSPMISC

For possible values of

"scenario"

For PMRCP files the scenarios have the format

For PMSSP files the scenarios have the format

Model codes in scenario names

• AIMCGE: AIM-CGE
• IMAGE: IMAGE
• GCAM4: GCAM
• MESGB: MESSAGE-GLOBIOM
• REMMP: REMIND-MAGPIE
• WITGB: WITCH-GLOBIOM

"country"

ISO 3166 three-letter country codes or custom codes for groups:

Additional "country" codes for country groups.

• EARTH: Aggregated emissions for all countries
• ANNEXI: Annex I Parties to the UNFCCC
• NONANNEXI: Non-Annex I Parties to the UNFCCC
• AOSIS: Alliance of Small Island States
• BASIC: BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India and China)
• EU28: European Union (still including the UK)
• LDC: Least Developed Countries
• UMBRELLA: Umbrella Group

"category"

Category descriptions.

• IPCM0EL: Emissions: National Total excluding LULUCF
• ECO: Economical data
• DEMOGR: Demographical data

"entity"

Gases and gas baskets using global warming potentials (GWP) from either Second Assessment Report (SAR) or Fourth Assessment Report (AR4).

Gases / gas baskets and underlying global warming potentials

• CH4: Methane (CH₄)
• CO2: Carbon Dioxide (CO₂)
• N2O: Nitrous Oxide (N₂O)
• FGASES: Fluorinated Gases (SAR): HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃
• FGASESAR4: Fluorinated Gases (AR4): HFCs, PFCs, SF₆, NF₃
• KYOTOGHG: Kyoto greenhouse gases (SAR)
• KYOTOGHGAR4: Kyoto greenhouse gases (AR4)

"unit"

The following units are used:

• Million2011GKD: Million 2011 international dollars
• ThousandPers: Thousand persons
• kt: kilotonnes
• Mt: Megatonnes
• Gg: Gigagrams
• MtCO2eq: Megatonnes of CO₂ equivalents using the GWPs defined by "entity"
• GgCO2eq: Gigagrams of CO₂ equivalents using the GWPs defined by "entity"

Remaining columns

Years from 1850-2100.

Data Sources

The following data sources were used during the generation of this dataset:

Scenario data

• RCP scenarios website/data
• SSP basic elements website/data
• SSP IAM scenarios website/data
• SSP CMIP6 scenarios website/data

Historical data

• CDIAC data
• CEDS CMIP6 data paper/data
• EDGAR version 4.3.2: data, paper
• IMO GHG report report
• PRIMAP-hist v2.1 paper, <a