# Ethnic protest in Europe

## Usage

    data(CVR)
    data(CVF)

## Description

This data set was used by Cebotari and Vink (2013), and it was taken here from the associated replication file Cebotari and Vink (2015).

## Format

A data frame containing 29 cases (ethnic minorities) and the following 6 columns:

`DEMOC`
Level of democracy
`ETHFRACT`
Degree of ethnic fractionalization
`GEOCON`
Territorial concentration
`POLDIS`
Political discrimination
`NATPRIDE`
National pride
`PROTEST`
Ethnopolitical protest

## Details

There are two different versions of the Cebotari and Vink data: `CVR` contains the raw data, and `CVF` contains the data calibrated to fuzzy-sets.

The causal conditions are:

`DEMOC` (contextual factor), based on a democracy index ranking countries on a scale from strong autocracies (0) to strong democracies (10). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 2, a crossover of 7 and an inclusion threshold of 9.5.

`ETHFRACT` (contextual factor), with raw scores ranging from a perfectly homogenous society (0) to a highly fragmented country (1). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 0.495 and an inclusion threshold of 0.8.

`GEOCON` (group-related factor) with raw data coded as: widely dispersed (0) and primarily urban minorities (1) considered territorially dispersed minorities, and ethnic comunities majoritary in a region (2) and entirely concentrated in one region (3) considered as territorially concentrated minorities. The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 1.25 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

`POLDIS` (group-related factor) captures discrimination practices toward minority groups that vary from no discrimination (0) to exclusive and repressive policies toward a minority group (4). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0, a crossover of 0.75 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

`NATPRIDE` (group-related factor) with raw scores ranging from ‘not at all proud’ (0) to ‘very proud’ (3). The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0.5, a crossover of 1.5 and an inclusion threshold of 2.5.

The outcome is the column `PROTEST`, measured on a range from 0 to 5 with higher values indicating more intense protest actions. The fuzzy scores were calibrated using an exclusion threshold of 0.5, a crossover of 1.5 and an inclusion threshold of 3.

## References

Cebotari, V.; Vink, M.P. (2013) “A Configurational Analysis of Ethnic Protest in Europe”. International Journal of Comparative Sociology vol.54, no.4, pp.298-324.

Cebotari, V.; Vink, M.P. (2015) “Replication Data for: A configurational analysis of ethnic protest in Europe”, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PT2IB9, Harvard Dataverse, V2