Near-Real-Time Monitoring of Crisis Responses

“It is easy to be wise after the event.”

Arthur Conan Doyle (The Complete Sherlock Holmes)

“Everything makes sense in hindsight.”

Daniel Kahneman (Thinking, Fast and Slow)

So, why not monitor stakeholders' responses to crises whilst they unfold?

Overview

Phase I (2022): Using near-real-time data on global news coverage from the Global Database on Events, Language, and Tone (GDELT v2.0), this research comprises so far the following projects:

1. Societal responses to Ukrainian refugee migration in Europe

2. Global politico-economic dynamics during a local conflict

Building on the GDELT data, which portrays contemporaneous developments and how they are received in the public discourse in 100 languages, this project can offer timely insights into how various crises may influence public perception, change interaction dynamics of societal stakeholders, and perhaps offer decision-makers near-real-time support. Beyond near-real-time analyses, this project will also provide a global perspective on cooperation dynamics between host societies and refugees in the long-term.

Phase II (2023): Building on insights from Phase I, the second phase evaluates the feasibility of a near-real-time Refugee Interaction and Interest Monitoring system for Europe. This system aims to combine GDELT events with other localised data, such as internet search trends or social media posts, to gauge geographically disaggregated societal responses to refugee presence with a minimum delay.

Project 1: A near-real-time analysis of societal responses to Ukrainian refugee migration in Europe

Goal: Monitor interactions of governments, legislatures, businesses, or civil society actors with Ukrainians being displaced by the conflict.

Research questions

• Who becomes more likely to display cooperative behaviour, such as providing aid or expressing the intent to cooperate in the short run?

• What trends in interaction modes can be observed over time?

• Are responses conditional on the severity of the conflict?

Extracting information on interaction modes (verbal or material conflict or cooperation) of actors in Ukraine's neighbours and the rest of Europe (REUR), daily attention towards Persons of Concern (PoC) can be easily monitored.

The below graph highlights that interactions with PoC, respectively their presence in the public discourse, were negligible across Europe before the outbreak of open hostilities on 24/02/2022.

Event study design

In the empirical analysis, changing attention levels towards PoC and the substitution of interaction modes (e.g. from cooperation to conflict) when interacting with PoC is evaluated on a daily basis across 39 European countries, 12 actor types, and 4 to 20 main interaction modes. Differentiating between actor types, such as various government branches, civil society, and business offers detailed insights into forces behind changing response dynamics.

Main findings

Presented results refer to a time horizon spanning two months before the outbreak of open hostilities and two months after:

• Interaction probabilities with PoC rose from almost zero to 4-13% in neighbouring countries, and to 1-2% in the rest of Europe.

• Peak support for PoChas been reached one week into the conflict for some countries. For others, relative attention or support levels either plateau after two weeks or show signs of decline after three weeks.

• For Ukraine’s neighbours, business actors showed the strongest responses in terms of engaging more frequently with PoC.

• These adjustments are not solely focused on verbal cooperation but manifest in more frequent material cooperation.

Project 2: Global politico-economic dynamics during a local conflict: Reciprocal patterns of cooperation and sanctions

Goal: Near-real-time analysis of interaction dynamics between Russia and other G20 economies.

Research questions

• How do interaction mods of major economies change in response to the outbreak of a local conflict?

• Who takes an opportunity to improve their standing with a sanctioned country?

• Are there reciprocal response dynamics such as the breakdown, re-emergence, or diversion of cooperation in the short-run?

Extracting information on interaction modes (verbal or material conflict or cooperation, including events related to sanctions) of major stakeholders in G20 countries, daily interaction patterns and their representation in the public discourse with Russia can be easily monitored. Moreover, it is also possible to evaluate the substitution of cooperative with confrontational behaviour on a daily basis.

Event study design: Response dynamics by interaction mode

In the empirical event study analysis, both changing levels of attention and the substitution of interaction modes when interacting with Russia were evaluated. A disaggregation by societal groups highlights the driving forces behind the shifts observed on the country level (see above figure). 

Main findings:

• Irrespective of whether cooperation probability increased or decreased, the main drivers are governments. 

• Stakeholders from the economy in the USA or EU display significantly decreased cooperation probabilities. In most other countries, economic stakeholders became more likely to engage in cooperation with Russia.

• These findings reveal notable differences regarding how stakeholders react. Economic interests may have the potential to counteract governmental responses. Yet there are also instances where political and economic responses are aligned. 

• On the global level, less cooperation from some countries may be an opportunity for others to fill in.

Reciprocal response analysis: Sanctions and cooperation

Offering a broader perspective on reciprocal patterns of cooperation and sanctions, the second analysis focuses on bilateral cooperation across all G20 countries. It estimates the probability to observe cooperative interactions initiated by actor 1 and directed at actor 2, given previous interactions initiated by actor 2 towards actor 1. The latter integrates the probability of past verbal cooperation or material cooperation, and the probability actor 2 threatened actor 1 with sanctions, boycott or an embargo or imposed it. 

Main findings:

• Cooperation between major G20 countries is highly reciprocal: Verbal and material cooperation become more likely after having experienced the respective cooperation in the recent past. 

• Sanction threats or implementations, however, are typically not followed by increased cooperation from the sanctioned side in the short term. 

• Relatively more intensive sanction experiences or those originating from particularly relevant countries may even elicit a more defiant stance. 

• Concomitantly, cooperation may be redirected towards actors less actively involved in sanctioning. This points to important trade-offs between achieving long-term politico-economic goals and short-term dynamics in international transactions.

Related publications

Weisser, R.A. (2024): Shots, sympathy, and societal support: How conflict intensity translates into cooperative behaviour towards the displaced; International Economics, 180 (download) 

Weisser, R.A. (2023): Global politico-economic dynamics during a local conflict: Reciprocal patterns of cooperation and sanctions; The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 23 (1), 213-242. (download preprint)

Weisser, R.A. (2023): A near-real-time analysis of societal responses to Ukrainian refugee migration in Europe; International migration, 61 (4), 17-36. (download) 

Work in progress

Weisser, R.A. (2022): Refugee presence and intergroup cooperation: A global long-term analysis. (download)