Hamburger R-Kurs, 08.-12.08.2016, Helmut-Schmidt-Universität

Institution: Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg

Lecturer: Prof. Dr. Torben Kuhlenkasper

Date: 08.-12.08.2016

Place: Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Holstenhofweg 85, 22043 Hamburg, Building H01, Seminarraum 0110

Language of instruction: German

Registration: Please mail to Vera Jahn

Contents:
In der Woche vom 08. bis 12.08.2016 wird Herr Prof. Dr. Torben Kuhlenkasper, Professor für quantitative Methoden an der Hochschule Pforzheim, an der HSU einen Blockkurs zur Einführung in die Statistik-Software R geben. Dabei handelt es sich um eine von Statistikern, aber zunehmend auch von Volkswirten verwendete Statistiksoftware, die kostenlos verwendet werden kann und extrem leistungsfähig ist.

Wir freuen uns daher sehr, dass wir mit Torben Kuhlenkasper für diesen Kurs einen sehr kompetenten Dozenten gewinnen konnten, der in die Geheimnisse von R einführen wird. Er hat den Kurs in den letzten Jahren bereits mit großem Erfolg an unserer Fakultät gehalten.

Der Kurs wird ganztägig im Gebäude H01, Seminarraum 0110 stattfinden. Teilnehmer werden gebeten, ihren eigenen Laptop mitzubringen. Das Kursprogramm inklusive Zeitplan findet sich hier.

Interessenten werden gebeten, sich bis zum 05.08.2016 per Mail bei Vera Jahn anzumelden.

 

Call for Papers: 5. Rhein-Ruhr Promovendensymposium “Arbeit und Soziale Sicherheit”

9./10. März 2017 in Duisburg

Das Rhein-Ruhr Promovendensymposium ist eine Veranstaltung, die das Institut Arbeit und Qualifikation (IAQ) und das Institut für Soziologie (IfS) der Universität Duisburg-Essen organisieren. Das Organisations- und Programmkomitee besteht aus PD Dr. Martin Brussig (IAQ) und Prof. Dr. Marcel Erlinghagen (IfS). Eine Förderung bei der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung wurde beantragt und in den Vorjahren bewilligt.

Die jährlich ausgerichtete Veranstaltung richtet sich an Promovendinnen und Promovenden unterschiedlicher sozialwissenschaftlicher Disziplinen und angrenzender Fächer (z.B. Soziologie, Wirtschaftswissenschaft, Politikwissenschaft), deren laufende Doktorarbeit einen Zusammenhang mit mindestens einem der beiden Oberthemen „Arbeit“ oder „Soziale Sicherheit“ aufweist. Im Rahmen des Symposiums besteht für die Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer die Möglichkeit, ihre im Entstehungsprozess befindliche Arbeit vorzustellen und mit erfahrenen Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern sowie anderen Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden intensiv zu diskutieren. Dabei sind sowohl theoretisch-konzeptionelle als auch empirische oder sozialpolitische Arbeiten gleichermaßen erwünscht.

Interessierte Promovendinnen und Promovenden können sich für die Präsentation ihrer Arbeit bewerben, indem sie bis zum 15. September 2016 eine Zusammenfassung ihres Vorhabens (maximal 3.000 Zeichen) einreichen. Eine Entscheidung über die Annahme des Vortragsvorschlags fällt spätestens bis zum 15. November 2016. Angenommene Bewerberinnen und Bewerber müssen den Organisatoren dann bis spätestens 31. Januar 2017 einen zusammenhängenden Aufsatz (maximal 60.000 Zeichen) zusenden.

Die ausgewählten Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer werden auf dem Symposium in maximal 20 Minuten wesentliche Aspekte ihrer Arbeit vortragen. Dieser Vortrag und der zuvor eingereichte Aufsatz werden anschließend durch eine(n) erfahrene(n) Forscher(in) kommentiert und im Plenum diskutiert. Für eingeladene Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer übernehmen die Organisatoren die anfallenden Fahrt- und Hotelkosten.

Bitte senden Sie Ihre Bewerbung in elektronischer Form an:

Prof. Dr. Marcel Erlinghagen
c/o Silke Demmler (Sekretariat)
Institut für Soziologie
Universität Duisburg-Essen

10th International Research Workshop “Methods for PhD”

September 25 – 30, 2016

Empirical research is seeking through methodological processes to discover, hopefully, nontrivial facts and insights. Beside choosing a topic and grounding an idea in theory, empirical research consists of gathering and analysing data as well as presenting results in scientific contexts. Our workshop tackles these steps of your research project:

  • Gathering data via (un)structured interviews or surveys and
  • using the computer for qualitative and quantitative data analysis.

The regular workshop fee is 449 Euro. It covers the participation in three courses, meals and accommodation. The workshop fee is 289 Euro without accommodation (only meals are included).

We are offering up to three funded scholarships to support refugee postgraduate students from Germany. Full details including eligibility criteria and how to apply for a scholarship can be found on the workshop website.

It is possible to get a certificate on 5 credit points (according to the European Credit Transfer System).

The following courses will be offered:

Parallel morning session 1 (26-28 September 2016):

  • Data Analysis with R
  • Data Analysis with Stata
  • Grounded Theory
  • Qualitative Interviewing
  • Developing Theoretical Contributions

Parallel afternoon session 2 (26-28 September 2016):

  • Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)
  • Case Study Research
  • Introduction to the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) and Applied Survival Analysis
  • Analyzing Panel and Spatial Data
  • Questionnaire Design

Parallel session at the SDU (30 September 2016):

  • Academic English Writing
  • Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) Modelling and Its Applications to Policy Impact Analysis
  • Introduction to Social Network Analysis
  • Reproducible Research with R and RStudio
  • Analysis of Qualitative Data and Exploratory Statistics

PLEASE note that the number of participants is limited to 20 persons per course! For further information, especially lecturers, program, organizers and registration visit our website: http://www.phd-network.eu/

For any questions don’t hesitate to contact the workshop committee (irwsnetwork@gmail.com).

The International Research Workshop is organised by

  • Prof. Dr. Wenzel Matiaske, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of Federal Armed Forces and Research Professor at the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin)
  • Asst. Prof. Dr. Simon Fietze, University of Southern Denmark, Campus Sønderborg
  • Dr. Heiko Stüber, Institute for Employment Research (IAB), The Research Institute of the Federal Employment Agency in Nuremberg

The workshop is supported by

  • University of Southern Denmark, Department of Entrepreneurship and Relationship Management
  • University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics
  • University of Flensburg
  • University of Hamburg, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences
  • University of Hamburg, School of Business
  • Leuphana University Lüneburg, Faculty of Economics
  • Werkstatt für Personal- und Organisationsforschung e.V.
  • German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) at the DIW Berlin

Call for Papers: Demands in the modern workplace

Special Issue of Management Revue
Demands in the modern workplace

Guest Editors:
Sascha Ruhle, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Johannes Siegrist, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Stefan Süß, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Eva-Ellen Weiß, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany

The flexibility of work organization and employment, the growing need for training and development, digitalization of work, the increasing blurring boundaries between work and private life – the list of developments that have shaped the modern working world in recent years is long. Those developments will continue to affect employees as well as organizations and economies. Especially for employees, several of these developments are challenges rather than improvements. Various approaches have increased our understanding of these and similar challenges, including the job demand-control model (Karasek, 1979), leader-member exchange (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995; Hesselgreaves & Scholarios, 2014), the effort–reward imbalance model (Siegrist, 2002) and the concept of work-family conflict (Barnett, 1998).

There are numerous indications that demands in the modern work place lead to elevated stress experiences (Sparks et al., 2001; Sverke et al., 2002; Stansfeld & Candy, 2006) and related health consequences (e.g. Schnall et al., 2009; Siegrist & Wahrendorf, 2016). Sources of stress may, for example, be rooted in role overload or even role underload depending on the type of demands (Shultz et al., 2010). Further, research shows that changing working conditions can provoke conflicts between work and private life (e.g., Byron, 2005). In the long run, impairments of job satisfaction and health can result as well in reduced work engagement and elevated turnover intentions (e.g., Kinnunen, 2008; Li et al., 2015). Thus, organizations increasingly aim at improving working conditions in order to keep their employees healthy and productive.

Divers options exist for organizations to tackle these challenges. For example, both supervisor and coworker support have been shown to reduce the negative consequences of demands (Luchman & González-Morales, 2015), and the same holds true for a transformational leadership style (Weiß & Süß, 2016), while an increase in time flexibility might even further strain the individual (e.g., Biron & van Veldhoven, 2016). Another way to deal with workplace demands might be the development of personal resources, which in turn can decrease burnout (Huang et al., 2015) or the adequate design of employees’ task fields (Shultz et al., 2010).

Yet, to answer challenges resulting from demands in the modern workplace, research might benefit from considering not only results from a single discipline, but a combined perspective. Multiple disciplines, like business administration, psychology, sociology, and occupational medicine contribute to, e.g., research on stress and resulting strain (e.g., Ganster & Rosen, 2013). A joint approach might further enhance our understanding of the prevention, occurrence, and the consequences of work demands as multiple perspectives on the area of research are being combined.

Therefore, prospective papers may address, but are not restricted to, the following questions:

  • Which individual and organizational consequences result from the various developments that characterize the modern working world? And how might organizations manage the different technological and economic changes in order to reduce negative consequences for employees?
  • Under what circumstances do particularly problematic work demands arise? What are the differences between various forms of employment and their influences on work demands?
  • How can organizations manage the various demands in the workplace and which approaches are the most promising ones? What possible help can leadership or co-worker support provide to face increasing work demands?
  • What are the socio-structural and economic antecedents of and consequences caused by work demands? Are there burdens which are unequally distributed among different social or occupational classes that account for differences in the exposure to changing demands?

Potential authors
Authors are encouraged to submit research manuscripts that are likely to make a significant contribution to the literature on demands in the modern workplace. The focus of the Special Issue is empirical – qualitative or quantitative – evidence, and we welcome contributions from business administration, industrial and organizational psychology, work sociology, and occupational medicine as well as other disciplines dealing with the topic of the Special Issue.

Deadline
Full papers for this special edition of “management revue” must be with the editors by 31 January 2017. All submissions will be subject to a double-blind review process. Papers invited for a “revise and resubmit” are due on 31 May 2017. Final decision will be made by September 2017. The special edition will be published in 2017 or 2018. Please submit your papers via email to Sascha Ruhle and Stefan Süß, using “management revue” as a subject.

Submission Guidelines
Manuscript length should not exceed 8,000 words (excluding references) and the norm should be 30 pages in double spaced type with margins of about 3 cm (1 inch) on each side of the page. Further, please follow the guidelines on the website http://www.management-revue.org/authors_guidelines.php and submit the papers electronically by sending a “blind” copy of your manuscript (delete all author identification from this primary document), and in a second document information that would typically appear on the document’s title page (title, author names, complete postal addresses, titles, affiliations, contact information including email, and phone).

We look forward to receiving your contribution!
Sascha Ruhle, Johannes Siegrist, Stefan Süß & Eva-Ellen Weiß

Call for Papers: Digital Working Life

Special Issue of Management Revue
Digital Working Life

Guest Editors:
Mikael Ottosson, Lund University (Sweden)
Calle Rosengren, Lund University (Sweden)
Doris Holtmann, Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg (Germany)
Wenzel Matiaske, Helmut Schmidt University Hamburg (Germany)

Working life is undergoing a radical change in which new digital technologies are changing the nature of labour and its organizational forms in a pervasive manner, regardless of whether it concerns qualified professionals or labourers. The framework, which previously regulated the content of work, as well as when, where and how it would be conducted is being reconsidered. A process that presents both challenges and possibilities.

One fundamental aspect of ICT is that it can make employees more accessible to others and allow work to become more available to the employee. Easy access to ICT functions (e.g., email, text and voice messages), for example, enable employees to continue working after leaving the office for the day. This ease of access may have both positive and negative effects. Although much of the research focus to date has concentrated on how ICT may act as demands, stressors or certain characteristics of ICT can enhance work-life balance, employee satisfaction, well-being and productivity.

Another aspect of new digital technologies concerns the manner in which the work process is monitored and controlled. Surveillance in the workplace is not a novelty. Nor is it unreasonable to expect that employers have both rights and reasons to do so. To a certain extent, of course. However, increasing availability of relatively inexpensive and easy to use technology, for example software monitoring programs, enables employers to expand the range and scope of their control over their employees’ activities. The increase in potential methods to track and monitor employee behaviour poses questions that concern where the borders for personal integrity are drawn. Who has the right to personal details, and at what point? In what way does this monitoring affect the social relations between employer and employee in terms of control, autonomy and trust?

Digital technology, in computers, phones or in the “Internet of things” also provides tools that enable the standardization of work on a completely different level than previously. For some workers, we see a degradation and depletion of work, and also that the control of work is increasing; a development that is usually described using the concept of “Digital Taylorism.” How does this development affect the working man or the working class?

In the special issue we would like to discuss our topic in an appropriately broad and interdisciplinary manner. We are particularly interested in questions such as:

  • Virtual work and stress
  • Digital technologies and work-family boundaries
  • Virtual teams and E-leadership
  • Digital Taylorism
  • Virtual work and trust
  • Digital surveillance

This is not an exhaustive list.

Deadline
Full papers for this Special Issue of Management Revue must be submitted by September 30th, 2016. All contributions will be subject to a double-blind review. Papers invited to a ‘revise and resubmit’ are due January 31st, 2017. Please submit your papers electronically via the online submission system at http://www.management-revue.org/submission/ using ‘SI Digital Working Life’ as article section.

Looking forward to hearing from you!
Mikael Ottosson
Calle Rosengren
Doris Holtmann
Wenzel Matiaske

Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) Modelling and Its Applications to Policy Impact Analysis

Institution: see Organisers & Supporters

Programme of study: International Research Workshop

Lecturer: Hans Kremers (Independent Researcher)

Date: Thursday, 29/09/16 (09:30 – 18:00)

Max. number of participants: 20

Credit Points: 5 CP for participating in the whole IRWS

Language of instruction: English

Contents:

Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) modelling has become a popular tool for policy impact analysis at many government, policy oriented, and academic institutions such as the EU, economic university departments, or policy assessment institutes such as the ZEW in Mannheim, CPB in The Netherlands. It even looks ’trendy’ to have your own CGE model. During the negotiations between the Greek government and the IWF, EU, and EZB, negotiatiors often call for quantitative assessments of the proposals, which might well be based on an application of the EU’s computable general equilibrium models. CGE models, like many other quantitative economic models are often unjustly considered to be the main culprit of economists supposed to be unaware of a financial crisis in the global finance system before 2008. In this short course, I want to provide more background information on what these models are and how they are applied to policy impact analysis. The course attendants should get some idea on what these models are good for and about their limitations. I refer to existing courses on CGE modelling regularly given by institutes such as GTAP (https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu), ECOMOD (http://ecomod.net), by the Gempack community at the Center of Policy Studies (CoPS) of Victoria University in Melbourne (http://www.copsmodels.com/gempack.htm), and by the GAMS community (http://www.gams.com) among many others. Furthermore, I refer to Shoven and Whalley (1992) and Ginsburgh and Keyzer (1997) as underlying standard literature.

We consider three significant developments in economics during the 20th century that have lead to the rise of CGE modelling within policy impact analysis. CGE models are calibrated on a social accounting matrix, comparable to a much extended input output table. This hence refers to long time developments in input-output modelling pioneered by the Russian economist Wassily Leontief, see Leontief (1936). Parallel to these developments, a mathematical theory of general equilibrium has been developed by well-known economists like Arrow, Debreu, Hahn, using insights from mathematical programming, often related to so-called fixed point proofs and related algorithms to prove the existence and uniqueness of an equilibrium. I refer to the PhD thesis of Gerard Debreu which builds up the general equilibrium model in all its mathematical detail, Debreu (1959), or to Arrow and Hahn (1971). The latter idea points us to the third development in economics, namely in developments of mathematical programming algorithms to compute an economic equilibrium in a general equilibrium model. The work of Herbert Scarf, Scarf and Hansen (1973), was seminal here, and formed the basis from which John Shoven and John Whalley built their CGE models. The introduction of computing equipment provided the means to be able to solve large models efficiently. The morning part of the course in CGE modelling is dedicated to a more detailed description of these three developments in economics and how they cooperate in what we nowadays call CGE modelling. We also describe how we perform a CGE analysis to assess the impact of a policy.

The afternoon is dedicated to introduce several existing CGE models and their applications of CGE modelling. We do so by presenting an existing study on the application of each model. Originally, following the Uruguay trade rounds, CGE models were applied to assess the impact of trade and tax policies until the Kyoto Protocol was signed to support a global effort to curb carbon emissions, which was expected to have significant effects on international trade flows. I again refer to Shoven and Whalley in Shoven and Whalley (1984) and Shoven and Whalley (1992) for applications on trade and taxes. Hence, the application of CGE models was extended to the assessment of climate policies. The GTAP model and underlying Social Accounting Matrix at Purdue University originated as a pure trade CGE model and database following the Uruguay trade rounds, but has, over time been extended to include climate related issues such as economy related carbon emissions, energy substitution, land use. The research, models and data can be found on their website, https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu. To further improve its application on this area, a demand arose to link, among others, CGE models with models from other, climate related areas such as meteorology, into so-called integrated assessment models. The increased attention of policy makers to the climate as well as signals that our current dependency on fossil fuel energy and issues of energy supply security endanger the economy also raised an interest in applying CGE models. Applying a CGE model to assess the impact of climate policies required an extension of the model. Again, a lot on this can be found in the extensive research database at GTAP. There exists an energy substitution variant of the GTAP model, referred to as GTAP-E (see Burniaux and Truong (2002)), which is often applied and extended to such issues as energy substitution, emission permits and carbon taxes, land use.

We also look at applications of CGE modelling to assess the impact of transport policies on the economy following the rise in transport problems such as congestion with the growth of many economies. An example of such transport issues is the inclusion of road pricing to stop congestion around big cities. There is a single country CGE model for Austria that looks at road pricing from a tax point of view. The model is referred to in Steininger and Friedl (2004). In Kalinowska, Kremers, and Truong (2008), we apply this model to the German case.

We will look at the application of a CGE model to a developing economy like Mongolia, where two large mines have been discovered, with a large impact on the local underdeveloped post-communist economy and neighbouring China and Russia. This regional single country CGE model is known as the Mon-CGE model and has been applied to the Mongolian economy to assess the impact of introducing an Energy Master-Plan within a project by the Asian Development Bank (ADB). For a description of the Mon-CGE model, as well as an application of the model to the Mongolian economy, I refer to Corong et al. (2011). Enkhbayar et al. (2010) also provide an interesting application of a regional CGE model to the Mongolian economy, within project based research.

Last but not least, we are currently looking at the construction and application of a regional CGE model to Sønderborg and the Southern Denmark regions within project zero (http://projectzero.dk). This project intends to offer a platform for initiatives in the Sønderborg region to introduce emission reduction measures such as renewable energy technologies into the local and regional economy of Sønderborg.

Attendants of this course are expected to have some background in economics, in particular micro economic theory, although I do not intend to go very deep into economic theory. I would like to ask interested PhDs to send an email to hkremers@icloud.com with a description of their background and what would interest them (models, applications, political issues etc.) in this course.

References

  • Arrow, K., and F. Hahn (1972), General Competitive Analysis, San Francisco, Holden-day.
  • Burniaux, J.M., and T.P. Truong (2002), “GTAP-E: An Energy-Environmental Version of the GTAP Model”, GTAP Technical Paper No. 16, GTAP, Purdue.
  • Corong, E., B. Decaluwé, and V. Robichaud (2011), “Assessing the Impact of Increased Foreign Direct Investment in Mongolia: A Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) Approach”, Mimeo, Asian Development Bank.
  • Debreu, G. (1954), Theory of Value, New-York, Wiley.
  • Enkhbayar, S., D. Roland-Holst, T. Oi, and G. Sugiyarto (2010), “Mongolia’s Investment Priorities from a National Development Perspective”, Mimeo, Asian Development Bank.
  • Ginsburgh, V., and M. Keyzer (1997), The structure of applied general equilibrium models, Cambridge, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
  • Kalinowska, Kremers, and Truong (2004), “Fitting passenger travel into a CGE model”, mimeo, DIW Berlin.
  • Leontief, W. (1936), “Quantitative input and output relations in the economic system of the United States”, Review of Economics and Statistics.
  • Scarf, H., and T. Hansen (1973), The Computation of Economic Equilibria, New Haven, Yale University Press.
  • Shoven, J.B., and J. Whalley (1984), “Applied general equilibrium models of taxation and international trade”, Journal of Economic Literature 22, 1007-1051.
  • Shoven, J.B., and J. Whalley (1992), Applying General Equilibrium, New York, Cambridge University Press.
  • Steininger, K. and B. Friedl (2004, June), “Economic and distributional impacts of nationwide car road pricing: a CGE analysis for Austria”, Paper submitted to the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Budapest.

You have to register for the 10th International Research Workshop to participate in this course.

Data Analysis with Stata

Institution: see Organisers & Supporters

Programme of study: International Research Workshop

Lecturer: Tobias Gramlich (GESIS – Leibniz Institute of Social Sciences)

Date: Monday, 26/09/16 – Wednesday, 28/09/16 from 09.00-12.30 h

Max. number of participants: 20

Credit Points: 5 CP for participating in the whole IRWS

Language of instruction: English

Contents:

Stata is a statistical program package widely used (not only) in the social and economical sciences; it is used for data management, statistical graphics and analysis of quantitative data. Statistical concepts will not be part of the course, so participants should have some very basic knowledge of statistics. The course should enable participants to prepare their data for analysis, perform adequate analysis using a statistical computer program and to document these tasks to keep them reproducible.

For Beginners with no or very little Stata knowledge!

Course topics cover:

  • “What You Type is What You Get”: Basic stata Command syntax
  • Getting (and Understanding) Help within stata: stata Bulit-in Help System
  • Basic Data Management: Load and Save stata Datasets, Generate and Manipulate Variables, Describe and Label Data and Variables, Perform Basic uni- and bivariate Analyses, Change the Structure of your Data
  • Basic stata Graphics: Scatterplot, Histogram, Bar Chart
  • Working with “Do-” and “Log-” Files

You have to register for the 10th International Research Workshop to participate in this course.

Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)

Institution: see Organisers & Supporters

Programme of study: International Research Workshop

Lecturer: Jonas Buche (Goethe-University Frankfurt)

Date: Monday, 26/09/16 – Wednesday, 28/09/16 from 14.30 – 18.00 h

Max. number of participants: 20

Credit Points: 5 CP for participating in the whole IRWS

Language of instruction: English

Contents:

Since the publication of the seminal work “The Comparative Method” by Charles Ragin in 1987, set-theoretic methods and especially Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) have become a common research strategy in the social sciences. Set-theoretic methods analyze cases with regard to the identification of sufficient and necessary conditions and assume set relations to be equifinal, conjunctural and asymmetric. Not least since so-called fuzzy sets have been introduced to the method, there has been a rising interest in QCA as a welcome alternative to both small-n case studies and large-n statistical analyses. In short, QCA is recommended if ‘if…then’ hypotheses are analyzed; if the goal is to derive sufficient and necessary conditions; if a comparison is planned; and if there is a mid-sized number of cases (between 10 and 60+).

The course offers a comprehensive introduction to QCA and is both conceptually and technically oriented. It starts off from an overview of the basics of set theory and demarcates QCA as a case oriented methods from both the quantitative and the interpretive-qualitative research paradigm. Through the notion of necessary and sufficient conditions and of truth tables, the single elements are built into the Truth Table Algorithm. However, this algorithm is not free of problems. Therefore, some pitfalls and strategies how to overcome them are presented. At the third day, the software tool fsQCA will be introduced and applied to published studies.

No prior knowledge is required. We will use the software fsQCA2.5 which can be downloaded at www.fsqca.com. Please note that the software does only operate on Apple Products with parallels!

Pre-readings:

  • Cebotari, Victor, and Maarten P. Vink (2013). “A Configurational Analysis of Ethnic Protest in Europe.” In International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Vol. 54(4), 298-324.
  • Emmenegger, Patrick. (2011). “Job Security Regulations in Western Democracies. A Fuzzy Set Analysis.” In European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 50(3), 336-64.
  • Freitag, Markus, and Raphaela Schlicht (2009). “Educational Federalism in Germany. Foundations of Social Inequality in Education.” In Governance, Vol. 22(1), 47-72.

Literature:

  • Schneider, Carsten Q./Wagemann, Claudius, 2012. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences. A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ragin, Charles C., 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry. Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Goertz, Gary/Mahoney, James, 2012. A Tale of Two Cultures: Quantitative and Qualitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

You have to register for the 10th International Research Workshop to participate in this course.

Introduction to the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) and Applied Survival Analysis

Institution: see Organisers & Supporters

Programme of study: International Research Workshop

Lecturer: PD Dr. Elke Holst (DIW Berlin & University of Flensburg), Andrea Schäfer, SOCIUM/Universität Bremen)

Date: Monday, 26/09/16 – Wednesday, 28/09/16 from 14.30 – 18.00 h

Max. number of participants: 20

Credit Points: 5 CP for participating in the whole IRWS

Language of instruction: English

Contents:

The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) is a wide-ranging representative longitudinal study of private households, located at the German Institute for Economic Research, DIW Berlin. Every year, there were nearly 11,000 households, and about 30,000 persons sampled. The data provide information on all household members, consisting of Germans living in the Old and New German States, Foreigners, and recent Immigrants to Germany. The Panel was started in 1984. Some of the many topics include household composition, occupational biographies, employment, earnings, health and satisfaction indicators. The course starts with an overview of the SOEP data structure and the research designs facilitated by longitudinal household studies that go beyond conventional surveys (household analysis, intergenerational analysis, life course research, etc.). The aim of the second part of this course is to give an introduction to the topic of survival analysis and use SOEP data to illustrate how to plot non-parametric estimates, test for differences between groups and how to fit a Cox’s semi-parametric proportional hazard model. General statistical concepts and methods in this course include e.g. types of censoring and truncation, survival and hazard functions, and semi-parametric proportional hazards model. Finally, we explore the motivation, strength and limits of Cox’s semi-parametric proportional hazard model.

Required: intermediate statistical knowledge, basic Stata skills

Recommended literature and pre-readings:

You have to register for the 10th International Research Workshop to participate in this course.

Case Study Research

Institution: see Organisers & Supporters

Programme of study: International Research Workshop

Lecturer: Dr. Kamil Marcinkiewicz (University of Hamburg)

Date: Monday, 26/09/16 – Wednesday, 28/09/16 from 14.30 – 18.00 h

Max. number of participants: 20

Credit Points: 5 CP for participating in the whole IRWS

Language of instruction: English

Contents:

The case study research is frequently applied in the social sciences. It is particularly popular among political scientists, especially those specializing in area studies. The ubiquity of the case study research contrasts with the scarcity of theoretical reflection on its core methodological aspects. Also the benefits of comparative analyses are often underestimated. In this course participants will have an opportunity to learn more about what the case study research is, what are its weakness and strengths and how should we go about the core question in designing a case study: selection of cases. The course combines lectures with practical exercises and discussion of students’ projects.

Recommended literature and pre-readings:

  • Gerring, J. (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices (pp. 17-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences (pp. 1-34). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Rueschemeyer, D. (2003). Can One or a Few Cases Yield Theoretical Gains? In J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences (pp. 305-337) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hall, P.A. (2008). Systematic Process Analysis: When and How to Use it. European Political Science, 7(3), 304-317.

You have to register for the 10th International Research Workshop to participate in this course.