Autocratic Client Regimes Dataset, 1946-2010
The Autocratic Client Regimes Dataset (ACRD) identifies all authoritarian client regimes, 1946-2010. I define an autocratic client regime as an authoritarian political regime in a formally independent state whose tenure a foreign sponsor makes serious effect to protect from potential internal or external threats.
The Autocrat Client Regimes Dataset (ACRD) uses over 500 primary and secondary sources in English and Russian to produce a time-varying measure of foreign sponsorship for all autocracies in the postwar period.
The dataset is complete but not yet publicly available. Please contact me for more information.
Revolutionary Regimes, 1900-2018
(with Steven R. Levitsky and Lucan Ahmad Way)
The Revolutionary Regimes Dataset identifies all political regimes with origins in violent social revolution, 1900-2018. The dataset defines social revolutions as the violent overthrow of an existing regime from below, accompanied by mass mobilization and at least a partial collapse of the state that gives rise to a new elite, which launches a rapid and radical transformation of the state and existing social order.
The dataset is complete but not yet publicly available.
(with Lucan Ahmad Way)
This dataset provides evidence of Russian interference in foreign elections and referenda since 1991. We restrict our analysis to interventions in elections, rather than Russian interference in foreign political systems more generally (i.e., cyberattacks against non-electoral targets such as defense establishments, the power grid, etc., or other forms of espionage). As such, we restrict our analysis to interference leading up to and during national elections and referenda.
We use publicly available evidence to catalogue all such attempts to the best extent possible. We use a variety of sources to gather this information. Most frequently, we rely on articles from reputable news organizations. We also consult publicly available U.S. government publications and assessments from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Senate and U.S. intelligence agencies. Finally, we consult a variety of congressional testimonies by experts, think tank reports, and scholarly publications. Of course, given the covert nature of these interventions, the strong denials by Russian government officials, and the uneven media attention to each intervention, missing information remains an important limitation. All sources consulted are cited in footnotes throughout the codebook.
After providing evidence of Russian interference and discussing the election outcome, we provide an admittedly subjective assessment of the extent to which the outcome is favorable to Russian government interests and the plausibility of a Russian impact on this outcome.
This codebook has been expanded from our earlier codebook to include cases from 2018. We have also reassessed cases included in the earlier analysis in light of recent revelations. This version is up to date as of February 18, 2019.
The codebook is available here. Please cite as:
Lucan Ahmad Way and Adam E. Casey. 2019. “Russian Election Interventions, 1991-2018.” Codebook version 2.