This dataset provides values for GDP reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

This data set contains a cross-country survey in 15 European countries on public perceptions of big-tech companies. The purpose of the dataset is to map out European citizens' perceptions of big-tech companies together with additional information that would allow to analyse how such perceptions are related to political and socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. The survey contains questions about how people perceive the political and social role of GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft), how much they trust these companies and how they perceive the need to regulate such companies. Furthermore, it contains questions on the political and ideological preferences of the respondents, how much they are satisfied with the political situation in their countries, how much they trust political institutions in their countries and what their attitudes are about the EU.

This dataset provides values for GDP PER CAPITA PPP reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

National accounts are a coherent and consistent set of macroeconomic indicators, which provide an overall picture of the economic situation and are widely used for economic analysis and forecasting, policy design and policy making.

Annual national accounts are compiled in accordance with the European System of Accounts - ESA 2010 as defined in Annex B of the Council Regulation (EU) No 549/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013, amended by Council Regulation (EU) 2023/734 of 15 March 2023.

Gross domestic product (GDP) is one of the key aggregates in the European system of accounts (ESA). GDP is a measure of the total economic activity taking place on an economic territory which leads to output meeting the final demands of the economy.

There are three ways of measuring GDP at market prices:

1. the production approach, as the sum of the values added by all activities which produce goods and services, plus taxes less subsidies on products;
2. the expenditure approach, as the total of all final expenditures made in either consuming the final output of the economy, or in adding to wealth, plus exports less imports of goods and services;
3. the income approach, as the total of all incomes earned in the process of producing goods and services plus taxes on production and imports less subsidies.

Data published in the following tables reflect these 3 approaches.

Breakdowns provided are based on the ESA Transmission Programme, which list all tables requested from the countries.

The annual tables under this collection are the following:

nama_10_gdp GDP and main components (output, expenditure and income)

nama_10_pc Main GDP aggregates per capita

nama_10_a10 Gross value added and income components by A*10 industry

nama_10_a64 Gross value added and income components by A*64 industry

Geographical entities covered are the European Union, the euro area, EU Member States, EFTA countries and Candidate Countries. Data from other countries (e.g. US, Japan and other countries) are received via the OECD and IMF and published in Eurobase in the naid_10 collection.

Data sources: National Statistical Institutes, Eurostat (for European aggregates)

This Data Set is derived from the WP4 of the AgriLink project. It is part of task T4.4 of Work Package (WP) 4 of the H2020 AgriLink project. AgriLink [Agricultural Knowledge: linking farmers, advisors and researchers to boost innovation] aims at better understanding the role of advisory services in farmers’ decision making and at boosting their contribution to innovation for sustainable development of agriculture. WP4 addresses more specifically the governance of farm advisory services. The objective of the research presented in this report is to understand the institutions that influence how farm advisory services function on the ground, and to discuss implications for the support for sustainable development innovation. Data were collected in seven European countries: the Czech Republic, France, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the UK. Data were collected for a diversity of types of innovation: Market, Technological, Process, and Social Innovation. The Data set was built based on interviews with farm advisory suppliers. In total 170 farm advisory suppliers were interviewed. The table below provides the distribution of interviews according to countries. Country Market innovation (NCRO & RETRO) Technological innovation (TECH) Process innovation (BIOP & SOIL) Social innovation (LABO & COMM) TOTAL Czech Republic 4 16 20 France 14 11 25 Greece 11 10 21 Poland 6 18 24 Portugal 11 20 31 Spain 9 29 38 UK 7 4 11 TOTAL 34 28 75 33 170 The data has two aims. First, to characterise farm advisory suppliers, in terms of (table below): what do they provide? Who is in control of the supplier? What do they provide Farmers NGO Private Public semi-public Total Advice and Bookkeeping 8 4 1 13 Advice and Digital tech 1 3 4 Advice and Education 2 4 3 5 14 Advice and Health services 1 2 3 Advice and Inputs 1 14 15 Advice and Inputs and Outputs 15 5 20 Advice and Machinery 7 7 Advice and Outputs 8 1 8 2 19 Advice and Research 2 2 5 12 1 22 Only advice and training 16 26 10 1 53 Total 53 7 76 32 2 170 Second, we have set a series of variables to characterise the services they provide. The main variables are: Number of advisors of the organisation Number of advisors Number of organisations in that group [0:5] 96 ]10:50] 35 ]5:10] 16 >50 19 n.a. 4 Total 170 Percentage of advisors in the staff of the organisation % of advisors Number of organisations [0:25[ 43 [25:50[ 17 [50:75[ 30 [75:100] 70 n.a. 10 Total 170 Share of back-office activities in the staff of the organisation Share of back-office (%) Number of organisations [0:25[ 41 [25:50[ 26 [50:75[ 66 [75:100] 24 n.a. 13 Total 170 Number of farmers client of the supplier per advisor Number of clients per organisation Number of organisation [0:25[ 31 [25:75[ 43 [50:75[ 3 [75:175[ 28 >175 36 n.a. 29 Total 170 Main advisory method Main Advisory method Number of organisations Group Advice 19 IT tool (app, software…) 2 n.a. 1 One to One Advice 129 Phone or web helpdesk 15 Publications 4 Total 170 Main funding source Main funding source Number of organisations EU funds 15 Fee-for-advice 46 Joint trade 42 Membership 11 Membership fee 6 n.a. 16 Public funding 3 Public funds 4 State budget 27 Total 170 More detailed information about the variables collected can be found in the questionnaire that is available in the appendix of the deliverable D4.2 of AgriLink

Ideas about the further development of the EU. Attitudes, knowledge, expectations and preferences. Topics: Nationality (multiple response possible); general contentment with life; preferred national as well as regional daily newspaper, TV station and radio station; regularity of use of selected sources of information; interest in politics; personal opinion leadership; intensity of use of news on TV, radio and daily newspapers; self-assessment of extent to which informed about the policies and institutions of the EU; attention regarding European topics in the last three months such as e. g. common European market, Treaty of Maastricht, Europe of two speeds, discussion about new member countries, summit meeting in Madrid and European currency union; description of expected development of the European Union in pair comparisons; approval of unification of Europe; approval of membership of the country in the European Union; advantageousness of membership of the country in the EU; assessment of the current speed of unification and desired speed of unification of Europe; perceived obstacles for unification of Europe; attitude to an expansion of the European Union; European citizenship or national consciousness; personal decision with a hypothetical referendum for or against membership in the European Union; attitude to the slogan ´let us shape a common Europe´; most important development steps for further development of a common Europe; preferred countries for new acceptance into the EU; selected political areas in which the European Union should be more active; feared negative developments in the European Union and assessment of probability of occurrence of these developments; assessment of the influence of the opinion of the people on decisions of the national government as well as decisions of the institution of the European Union; preference for national or European decision-making authority in selected political areas; national politicians, associations, organizations, parties, institutions and media that stand for believable information about the EU; most important rights of a European citizen; hope in the common European market; judgment on selected recommendations for the development of European policies; attitude to treating the newly arriving Eastern European countries equally with the less developed regions in Europe; knowledge test about the correct number of member countries, European personalities, the name of the common currency, currency questions, flag and presidency; acceptance of the name EURO for the new currency; knowledge about the primary expenditure in the European budget; interest in increased information about the European Union; interest in new sources of information about the EU, such as e. g. telephone queries, special fax queries and opportunities of computer queries as well as special information offices about the EU; availability to respondent of information technology such as video recorder, fax device, satellite reception, decoder for Pay-TV, teletext, computer, CD-ROM, modem and Internet; trust in the European Commission, the national government, the European Parliament, the national parliament and the council of ministers; attitude to a federal structure for the European Union; assumed attitude of selected occupational groups, associations and organizations to European unification and designation of those gaining the greatest advantages from unification; countries profiting the most from the EU; self-classification on a left-right continuum; party preference (closeness and Sunday question); rural or urban residential area; possession of a telephone and reasons for not having a telephone. The following question was also posed to farmers and those helping in agricultural companies: primary harvest month. Additionally encoded were: date of interview; time at start of interview; length of interview; number of persons present during interview; willingness of respondent to cooperate. Vorstellungen über die weitere Entwicklung der EU. Einstellungen, Kenntnisse, Erwartungen und Präferenzen. Themen: Staatsangehörigkeit (Mehrfachnennung möglich); allgemeine Lebenszufriedenheit; präferierte nationale wie auch regionale Tageszeitung, TV-Kanal und Radiosender; Regelmäßigkeit der Nutzung von ausgewählten Informationsquellen; Politikinteresse; eigene Meinungsführerschaft; Intensität der Nachrichtennutzung in TV, Rundfunk und Tageszeitungen; Selbsteinschätzung der Informiertheit über die Politik und die Institutionen der EU; Aufmerksamkeit bezüglich europäischer Themen in den letzten drei Monaten wie z. B. gemeinsamer europäischer Markt, Vertrag von Maastricht, Europa der zwei Geschwindigkeiten, Diskussion über neue Mitgliedstaaten, Gipfeltreffen in Madrid und europäische Währungsunion; Beschreibung der erwarteten Entwicklung der Europäischen Union in Paarvergleichen; Befürwortung der Vereinigung Europas; Befürwortung der Mitgliedschaft des Landes in der Europäischen Union; Vorteilhaftigkeit der Mitgliedschaft des Landes in der EU; Einschätzung der aktuellen Vereinigungsgeschwindigkeit und gewünschte Geschwindigkeit der Vereinigung Europas; empfundene Hindernisse für die Vereinigung Europas; Einstellung zu einer Erweiterung der Europäischen Union; Europabürgertum oder Nationalbewusstsein; eigene Entscheidung bei einem angenommenen Referendum für oder gegen die Mitgliedschaft in der Europäischen Union; Einstellung zu dem Slogan "Lasst uns ein gemeinsames Europa gestalten"; wichtigste Entwicklungsschritte für die Weiterentwicklung eines gemeinsamen Europas; präferierte Länder für eine Neuaufnahme in die EU; ausgewählte Politikbereiche, in denen die Europäische Union aktiver werden sollte; befürchtete negative Entwicklungen in der Europäischen Union und Einschätzung der Eintretenswahrscheinlichkeit dieser Entwicklungen; Einschätzung des Einflusses der Meinung des Volkes auf die Entscheidungen der nationalen Regierung sowie die Entscheidungen der Institution der Europäischen Union; Präferenz für nationale oder europäische Entscheidungsbefugnis in ausgewählten politischen Bereichen; nationale Politiker, Verbände, Organisationen, Parteien, Institutionen und Medien, die für glaubhafte Informationen über die EU stehen; wichtigste Rechte eines europäischen Bürgers; Hoffnung auf den Gemeinsamen Europäischen Markt; Beurteilung ausgewählter Vorschläge für die Entwicklung der europäischen Politik; Einstellung zu einer Gleichbehandlung neu hinzukommender osteuropäischer Staaten mit den weniger entwickelten Regionen in Europa; Kenntnistest über die korrekte Zahl der Mitgliedstaaten, europäische Persönlichkeiten, über den Namen der gemeinsamen Währung, über Währungsfragen, Flagge und Präsidentschaft; Akzeptanz des Namens EURO für die neue Währung; Kenntnis des Hauptausgabepostens im europäischen Budget; Interesse an vermehrter Information über die Europäische Union; Interesse an neuen Informationsquellen über die EU, wie z. B. Telefonabfragen, spezielle Faxabfragen und Computerabfragemöglichkeiten sowie spezielle Informationsbüros über die EU; Ausstattung des Befragten mit Informationstechnologie wie Videorecorder, Faxgerät, Satellitenempfang, Decoder für Pay-TV, Teletext, Computer, CD-ROM, Modem und Internet; Vertrauen in die Europäische Kommission, die nationale Regierung, das Europaparlament, das nationale Parlament und den Ministerrat; Einstellung zu einer föderalen Struktur für die Europäische Union; vermutete Einstellung ausgewählter Berufsgruppen, Verbände und Organisationen zur europäischen Vereinigung und Bezeichnung derjenigen, die die größten Vorteile aus der Vereinigung ziehen; Länder, die am meisten von der EU profitieren. Demographie: Nationalität; Selbsteinschätzung auf einem Links-Rechts-Kontinuum; Parteipräferenz (Nähe und Sonntagsfrage); Familienstand; Alter bei Ende der Ausbildung; Geschlecht; Alter; Anzahl der Personen im Haushalt; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt; berufliche Position; Haushaltsvorstand; berufliche Position des Haushaltsvorstandes; Tätigkeit von Personen im Haushalt in der Landwirtschaft, dem Fischereiwesen oder der Forstwirtschaft; Urbanisierungsgrad; monatliches Haushaltseinkommen. Zusätzlich verkodet wurden: Interviewdatum und Interviewbeginn; Interviewdauer; Anzahl der beim Interview anwesenden Personen; Kooperationsbereitschaft des Befragten; Ortsgröße; Region; Postleitzahl; Intervieweridentifikation; Telefonbesitz und Gründe für keinen Telefonbesitz. In Luxemburg, Belgien und Finnland: Interviewsprache. Landwirte und Mithelfende in landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben wurden zusätzlich gefragt: Haupterntemonat (Monat, in dem die meiste Arbeit anfällt).

This dataset provides values for POPULATION reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

The presented dataset contains the centroid distance matrix for the different levels of the European Union's (EU) Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) regions in meters, as well as their code, name, level, and country identifier. Centroids are calculated based on the largest contiguous shape of regions. To support EU-related spatial, regional, and geographical studies, an R function is also attached that compiles the aforementioned dataset for the selected (or all) NUTS levels while complementing it with the geometrical data and centroids of regions. Optionally, this R function displays centroids on a map of Europe to ease the verification of their positions.

Please cite as: • (Data in Brief article)

All cities with a population > 1000 or seats of adm div (ca 80.000)Sources and ContributionsSources : GeoNames is aggregating over hundred different data sources. Ambassadors : GeoNames Ambassadors help in many countries. Wiki : A wiki allows to view the data and quickly fix error and add missing places. Donations and Sponsoring : Costs for running GeoNames are covered by donations and sponsoring.Enrichment:add country name

The European Values Study is a large-scale, cross-national and longitudinal survey research program on how Europeans think about family, work, religion, politics, and society. Repeated every nine years in an increasing number of countries, the survey provides insights into the ideas, beliefs, preferences, attitudes, values, and opinions of citizens all over Europe.

As previous waves conducted in 1981, 1990, 1999, 2008, the fifth EVS wave maintains a persistent focus on a broad range of values. Questions are highly comparable across waves and regions, making EVS suitable for research aimed at studying trends over time.

The new wave has seen a strengthening of the methodological standards. The full release of the EVS 2017 includes data and documentation of altogether 37 participating countries. For more information, please go to the EVS website.

Morale, religious, societal, political, work, and family values of Europeans.

Topics: 1. Perceptions of life: importance of work, family, friends and acquaintances, leisure time, politics and religion; happiness; self-assessment of own health; memberships in voluntary organisations (religious or church organisations, cultural activities, trade unions, political parties or groups, environment, ecology, animal rights, professional associations, sports, recreation, or other groups, none); active or inactive membership of humanitarian or charitable organisation, consumer organisation, self-help group or mutual aid; voluntary work in the last six months; tolerance towards minorities (people of a different race, heavy drinkers, immigrants, foreign workers, drug addicts, homosexuals, Christians, Muslims, Jews, and gypsies - social distance); trust in people; estimation of people´s fair and helpful behavior; internal or external control; satisfaction with life; importance of educational goals: desirable qualities of children.

1. Work: attitude towards work (job needed to develop talents, receiving money without working is humiliating, people turn lazy not working, work is a duty towards society, work always comes first); importance of selected aspects of occupational work; give priority to nationals over foreigners as well as men over women in jobs.

2. Religion and morale: religious denomination; current and former religious denomination; current frequency of church attendance and at the age of 12; self-assessment of religiousness; belief in God, life after death, hell, heaven, and re-incarnation; personal god vs. spirit or life force; importance of God in one´s life (10-point-scale); frequency of prayers; morale attitudes (scale: claiming state benefits without entitlement, cheating on taxes, taking soft drugs, accepting a bribe, homosexuality, abortion, divorce, euthanasia, suicide, paying cash to avoid taxes, casual sex, avoiding fare on public transport, prostitution, in-vitro fertilization, political violence, death penalty).

3. Family: trust in family; most important criteria for a successful marriage or partnership (faithfulness, adequate income, good housing, sharing household chores, children, time for friends and personal hobbies); marriage is an outdated institution; attitude towards traditional understanding of one´s role of man and woman in occupation and family (gender roles); homosexual couples are as good parents as other couples; duty towards society to have children; responsibility of adult children for their parents when they are in need of long-term care; to make own parents proud is a main goal in life.

4. Politics and society: political interest; political participation; preference for individual freedom or social equality; self-assessment on a left-right continuum (10-point-scale) (left-right self-placement); individual vs. state responsibility for providing; take any job vs. right to refuse job when unemployed; competition good vs. harmful for people; equal incomes vs. incentives for individual effort; private vs. government ownership of business and industry; postmaterialism (scale); most important aims of the country for the next ten years; willingness to fight for the country; expectation of future development (less importance placed on work and greater respect for authority); trust in institutions; essential characteristics of democracy; importance of democracy for the respondent; rating democracy in own country; satisfaction with the political system in the country; preferred type of political system (strong leader, expert decisions, army should ...

The 6th Vintage of CompNet dataset represents an unbalanced panel dataset which covers 19 European countries. This provides researchers with a dataset for cross-country studies that includes a rich set of indicators from five different fields: productivity, finance, labour, competition and trade. CompNet variables and indicators are available for two samples: “full” and “20E”. The full sample intended to cover the period 1999-2016 for most of the countries in the sample. However, actual data availability reduces this time span to 2003-2015 for the majority of the participating countries. In some countries, firms are legally obliged to report their balance sheet data only when certain thresholds are met. For example, in Poland only firms with more than 10 employees have to report their accountings. To provide a more homogeneous sample across countries, CompNet therefore constructed also the 20E sample, including only firms that have at least 20 employees for the same time span. Content coding Data provider collect firm-level information from balance sheet and administrative statistical registries. We run a harmonized protocol across each firm-level data set to construct our indicators. Self-administered questionnaire In most cases, data rely on business registers of national banks or statistical offices, complemented with other firm-level sources, either to enrich firm coverage, or to include additional information, as, for instance, trade values. Across all countries, the target population of the firm-level datasets is narrowed down to consistently include non-financial corporations with employees. The country coverage of this vintage contains up to 19 countries, including the six biggest EU economies (Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands and Poland).

Dataset for content analysis published in "Hornikx, J., Meurs, F. van, Janssen, A., & Heuvel, J. van den (2020). How brands highlight country of origin in magazine advertising: A content analysis. Journal of Global Marketing, 33 (1), 34-45."*Abstract (taken from publication)Aichner (2014) proposes a classification of ways in which brands communicate their country of origin (COO). The current, exploratory study is the first to empirically investigate the frequency with which brands employ such COO markers in magazine advertisements. An analysis of about 750 ads from the British, Dutch, and Spanish editions of Cosmopolitan showed that the prototypical ‘made in’ marker was rarely used, and that ‘COO embedded in company name’ and ‘use of COO language’ were most frequently employed. In all, 36% of the total number of ads contained at least one COO marker, underlining the importance of the COO construct.*Methodology (taken from publication)SampleThe use of COO markers in advertising was examined in print advertisements from three different countries to increase the robustness of the findings. Given the exploratory nature of this study, two practical selection criteria guided our country choice: the three countries included both smaller and larger countries in Europe, and they represented languages that the team was familiar with in order to reliably code the advertisements on the relevant variables. The three European countries selected were the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The dataset for the UK was discarded for testing H1 about the use of English as a foreign language, as will be explained in more detail in the coding procedure.The magazine Cosmopolitan was chosen as the source of advertisements. The choice for one specific magazine title reduces the generalizability of the findings (i.e., limited to the corresponding products and target consumers), but this magazine was chosen intentionally because an informal analysis suggested that it carried advertising for a large number of product categories that are considered ethnic products, such as cosmetics, watches, and shoes (Usunier & Cestre, 2007). This suggestion was corroborated in the main analysis: the majority of the ads in the corpus referred to a product that Usunier and Cestre (2007) classify as ethnic products. Table 2 provides a description of the product categories and brands referred to in the advertisements. Ethnic products have a prototypical COO in the minds of consumers (e.g., cosmetics – France), which makes it likely that the COOs are highlighted through the use of COO markers.Cosmopolitan is an international magazine that has different local editions in the three countries. The magazine, which is targeted at younger women (18–35 years old), reaches more than three million young women per month through its online, social and print platforms in the Netherlands (Hearst Netherlands, 2016), has about 517,000 readers per month in Spain (PrNoticias, 2016) and about 1.18 million readers per month in the UK (Hearst Magazine U.K., 2016).The sample consisted of all advertisements from all monthly issues that appeared in 2016 in the three countries. This whole-year cluster was selected so as to prevent potential seasonal influences (Neuendorf, 2002). In total, the corpus consisted of 745 advertisements, of which 111 were from the Dutch, 367 from the British and 267 from the Spanish Cosmopolitan. Two categories of ads were excluded in the selection process: (1) advertisements for subscription to Cosmopolitan itself, and (2) advertisements that were identical to ads that had appeared in another issue in one of the three countries. As a result, each advertisement was unique.Coding procedureFor all advertisements, four variables were coded: product type, presence of types of COO markers, COO referred to, and the use of English as a COO marker. In the first place, product type was assessed by the two coders. Coders classified each product to one of the 32 product types. In order to assess the reliability of the codings, ten per cent of the ads were independently coded by a second coder. The interrater reliability of the variable product category was good (κ = .97, p < .000, 97.33% agreement between both coders). Table 2 lists the most frequent product types; the label ‘other’ covers 17 types of product, including charity, education, and furniture.In the second place, it was recorded whether one or more of the COO markers occurred in a given ad. In the third place, if a marker was identified, it was assessed to which COO the markers referred. Table 1 lists the nine possible COO markers defined by Aichner (2014) and the COOs referred to, with examples taken from the current content analysis. The interrater reliability for the type of COO marker was very good (κ = .80, p < .000, 96.30% agreement between the coders), and the interrater reliability for COO referred to was excellent (κ = 1.00, p < .000).After the independent assessments of the two...

BackgroundSocioeconomic inequalities in alcohol-related mortality have been documented in several European countries, but it is unknown whether the magnitude of these inequalities differs between countries and whether these inequalities increase or decrease over time.Methods and FindingsWe collected and harmonized data on mortality from four alcohol-related causes (alcoholic psychosis, dependence, and abuse; alcoholic cardiomyopathy; alcoholic liver cirrhosis; and accidental poisoning by alcohol) by age, sex, education level, and occupational class in 20 European populations from 17 different countries, both for a recent period and for previous points in time, using data from mortality registers. Mortality was age-standardized using the European Standard Population, and measures for both relative and absolute inequality between low and high socioeconomic groups (as measured by educational level and occupational class) were calculated.Rates of alcohol-related mortality are higher in lower educational and occupational groups in all countries. Both relative and absolute inequalities are largest in Eastern Europe, and Finland and Denmark also have very large absolute inequalities in alcohol-related mortality. For example, for educational inequality among Finnish men, the relative index of inequality is 3.6 (95% CI 3.3–4.0) and the slope index of inequality is 112.5 (95% CI 106.2–118.8) deaths per 100,000 person-years. Over time, the relative inequality in alcohol-related mortality has increased in many countries, but the main change is a strong rise of absolute inequality in several countries in Eastern Europe (Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia) and Northern Europe (Finland, Denmark) because of a rapid rise in alcohol-related mortality in lower socioeconomic groups. In some of these countries, alcohol-related causes now account for 10% or more of the socioeconomic inequality in total mortality.Because our study relies on routinely collected underlying causes of death, it is likely that our results underestimate the true extent of the problem.ConclusionsAlcohol-related conditions play an important role in generating inequalities in total mortality in many European countries. Countering increases in alcohol-related mortality in lower socioeconomic groups is essential for reducing inequalities in mortality. Studies of why such increases have not occurred in countries like France, Switzerland, Spain, and Italy can help in developing evidence-based policies in other European countries.

This dataset provides values for GDP ANNUAL GROWTH RATE reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

The empirical dataset is derived from a survey carried out on 25 estates in 14 cities in nine different European countries: France (Lyon), Germany (Berlin), Hungary (Budapest and Nyiregyha´za), Italy (Milan), the Netherlands (Amsterdam and Utrecht), Poland (Warsaw), Slovenia (Ljubljana and Koper), Spain (Barcelona and Madrid), and Sweden (Jo¨nko¨ping and Stockholm). The survey was part of the EU RESTATE project (Musterd & Van Kempen, 2005). A similar survey was constructed for all 25 estates.

The survey was carried out between February and June 2004. In each case, a random sample was drawn, usually from the whole estate. For some estates, address lists were used as the basis for the sample; in other cases, the researchers first had to take a complete inventory of addresses themselves (for some deviations from this general trend and for an overview of response rates, see Musterd & Van Kempen, 2005). In most cities, survey teams were hired to carry out the survey. They worked under the supervision of the RESTATE partners. Briefings were organised to instruct the survey teams. In some cases (for example, in Amsterdam and Utrecht), interviewers were recruited from specific ethnic groups in order to increase the response rate among, for example, the Turkish and Moroccan residents on the estates. In other cases, family members translated questions during a face-to-face interview. The interviewers with an immigrant background were hired in those estates where this made sense. In some estates it was not necessary to do this because the number of immigrants was (close to) zero (as in most cases in CE Europe).

The questionnaire could be completed by the respondents themselves, but also by the interviewers in a face-to-face interview.

Data and Representativeness

The data file contains 4756 respondents. Nearly all respondents indicated their satisfaction with the dwelling and the estate. Originally, the data file also contained cases from the UK.

However, UK respondents were excluded from the analyses because of doubts about the reliability of the answers to the ethnic minority questions. This left 25 estates in nine countries. In general, older people and original populations are somewhat over-represented, while younger people and immigrant populations are relatively under-represented, despite the fact that in estates with a large minority population surveyors were also employed from minority ethnic groups. For younger people, this discrepancy probably derives from the extent of their activities outside the home, making them more difficult to reach. The under-representation of the immigrant population is presumably related to language and cultural differences. For more detailed information on the representation of population in each case, reference is made to the reports of the researchers in the different countries which can be downloaded from the programme website. All country reports indicate that despite these over- and under-representations, the survey results are valuable for the analyses of their own individual situation.

This dataset is the result of a team effort lead by Professor Ronald van Kempen, Utrecht University with funding from the EU Fifth Framework.

Empowering’ university policies improve our economies, states the recent report of Empower European Universities called The State of University Policy for progress in Europe. This report assesses the contribution of higher education policies to higher education performance and economic innovation. The main findings are summarized in a policy report, the technical report explains the data we have used and method, the country reports provide a snapshot of each one of the 32 countries.Higher education contributes to economic innovation. This study measures and compares the extent to which national governments’ policies foster this contribution across Europe. The study stresses the relevance of policies which are ‘empowering’ for higher education institutions, or in other words provide them with appropriate resources and regulatory environments.The assessment relies on quantitative scores, based on the contribution of policies regarding funding and autonomy to higher education performance in education, research and economic innovation, using non-arbitrary weights and eighteen policy indicators across 32 European countries. A large number of countries belong to a ‘middle group’ in our overall assessment, indicating a relative cohesion in Europe. Yet, substantial variations exist in terms of higher education policy in Europe, each European country having room for policy improvement.

This table contains figures on the number of companies (absolute and relative) that import and export goods or services. These are companies that are active in the Business Economy. In addition, figures are available about the trade value, expressed in millions of euros. The data can be broken down into a few size groups, the independence of the company and the main countries (in terms of trade value) with which trade has been conducted. For trade in services, no breakdown by country is available for countries outside the EU. This table has been developed for the 'State of SMEs' programme. Data available from: 2015. Status of the figures: The figures in the table up to and including 2019 are final, those for 2020 and later are provisional. Changes as of October 7, 2022: The data for 2019 and 2020 have been adjusted on the basis of subsequent information. The data for 2021 has been added. When will new numbers come out? New figures are expected in mid-2023.

The Mosquito Alert dataset includes occurrence records of adult mosquitoes. The records were collected through Mosquito Alert, a citizen science system for investigating and managing disease-carrying mosquitoes. Each record presented in the database is linked to a photograph submitted by a citizen scientist and validated by entomological experts to determine if it provides evidence of the presence of any of five targeted mosquito vectors of top concern in Europe (i.e. Aedes albopictus, Aedes aegypti, Aedes japonicus, Aedes koreicus, Culex pipiens). The temporal coverage of the database is from 2014 through 2022 and the spatial coverage is worldwide. Most of the records from 2014 to 2020 are from Spain, reflecting the fact that the project was funded by Spanish national and regional funding agencies. Since autumn 2020 the data has expanded to include substantial records from other countries in Europe, particularly the Netherlands, Italy, and Hungary, thanks to a human volunteering network of entomologists coordinated by the AIM-COST Action and to technological developments through the VEO project to increase scalability. Among many possible applications, Mosquito Alert dataset facilitates the development of citizen-based early warning systems for mosquito-borne disease risk. This dataset can be further re-used for modelling vector exposure risk or training machine-learning detection and classification routines on the linked images, to help experts in data validation and build up automated alert systems.

This version contains errors; please use the data from version 1.1 or later.

Inventory description

The Harmonized IACS inventory of Europe-LAND is a harmonized collection of data from the Geospatial Aid (GSA) system of the Integrated Control and Administration System (IACS), which manages and controls agricultural subsidies in the European Union (EU). The GSA data are a unique data source with field-levels of land use information that are annually generated. The data carry information on crops grown per field, a unique identifier of the subsidy applicants that allows to aggregate fields to farms, information on organic cultivation and animal numbers per farm.

Due to General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), we are not allowed to share all data that we collected and harmonized. Therefore, there are two versions of the inventory, a public version and an internal version. The internal version contains more information and covers more countries and years.

The public version contains all data that can be shared following the GDPR of the data providers. It covers 18 countries with time series up to 17 years. For most countries, only the crop information can be shared. However, for 6 countries also the applicant identifier and for two of them also the organic management information can be shared. If you use the data, please also cite the original sources of the data. You can find the references in the provided documentation that is in the "_Documentation.zip".

The crop information were harmonized using the Hierarchical Crop and Agriculture Taxonomy (HCAT) of the EuroCrops project (Schneider et al., 2023). To allow for interoperability with EuroCrops, the harmonized Europe-LAND data come with the same column names that relate to the crop information. All crop mapping tables can be found in our GitHub repository.

Column names:

• field_id (mandatory): Unique identifier for each field per country, state or region
• farm_id (optional): Unique identifier for each applicant per country, state, or region
• crop_code (mandatory): The original, country-specific crop code
• crop_name (mandatory): The original, country-specific crop name
• EC_trans_n (mandatory): The original crop name translated into English
• EC_hcat_n (mandatory): The machine-readable HCAT name of the crop
• EC_hcat_c (mandatory): The 10-digit HCAT code indicating the hierarchy of the crop
• organic (optional): Indicates whether a field was organically cultivated or not. Values: [0,1]
• field_size (mandatory): Size of field in hectares
• crop_area (optional): Area in hectares of crop reported in crop column. This occurs only if multiple crops are reported per parcel and refers to the area of the main crop.

More detailed information for all countries in our harmonized inventory (including those that are not publicly available) can also be found in the documentation.

The inventory will be updated at least annually. In future versions, we will add a new crop classification, harmonized animal data, and harmonized agri-environmental measures/eco-schemes.

Information on data provision

All files come as .geoparquets to stay within the space limitations of Zenodo. Geoparquets can simply be opened in QGIS via drag and drop. Additionally, various libraries from different porgramming languages are able to handle geoparquets, e.g. geoarrow and sgarrwo in R, GDAL/OGR in C++, GeoParquet.jl in Julia or Fiona in Python.

We bundled multiple years of each country to stay below the file number limitation of Zenodo. Each zip file name indicates the country, region, or federal state and the years covered. The meaning of the abbreviations of the countries, regions, and federal states can be found in the "country_region_codes.xlsx" in the "_Documentation.zip".

The Spanish data are also bundled across regions, as they are separated into more than 50 regions. See the country_regions_codes.xlsx tables for the meaning of the abbreviations:

• ES_Bundle1 (Northeast): BAL, BAR, CAS, GIR, HEC, LLE, NAV, TAR, TER, ZAR
• ES_Bundel2 (Northwest): ACO, ALA, AST, BUR, CAN, GUI, LEO, LRI, LUG, OUR, PAL, PON, VIZ, VLD, ZAM
• ES_Bundle3 (West): ALB, AVI, CAC, CIU, CUE, GUA, MAD, SAL, SEG, SOR, TOL
• ES_Bundle4 (Southwest): ALI, ALM, BAD, CAD, CDB, GRA, HEV, JAE, LAP, MAL, MUR, SAN, SEV, VLC

Data are based on a study on the systemic factors correlated with the transnational media coverage of foreign news. The dataset matches information provided by various data sources in order to performs a quantitative assessment of the systemic determinants of the network of EU transnational citations through the articles published in the main national media. The main source consists of a large dataset created by Economisti Associati on the transnational coverage of foreign news based on 148 national media and 1.96 million articles published between 16 August and 15 November 2010 by the main general and business newspapers in the EU countries. For each European country the foreign news coverage was measured in terms of the presence of references to other EU countries (target countries) in articles published in national media. References to foreign EU countries are sought in the title and body of every article through search strings containing the name of the target countries, translated into various languages. For each European country, the number of articles published in reference to each target country has been normalized on the total number of articles published in the country itself. Starting from this information, the unit of analysis of the dataset is the probability that an article published in a given European country refers to each of the target countries. The dataset combines information about media coverage with some indicators produced by other European sources. In particular: Eurostat: average population of the countries over the period 2000-2010; average GDP per capita in PPS over the period 2000-2010; bilateral trade flows as a fraction of the total international trade flows averaged over the period 1999-2001; CEPII (Center d'études prospectives et d'informations internationales): bilateral weighted distances and language commonality); CHES (Chapel Hill Expert Survey): political orientation in 2010; ECB (European Central Bank): average long-term interest rates over the period August-November 2010. The dataset is organized in 729 cases and 25 variables. 729 media relations. No sampling data aggregation other