The Battle Deaths - Essay Example

ESSAY, OTHER THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRIO BATTLE DEATHS DATASET AND THE UPPSALA BATTLE-RELATED DEATHS DATASET By Institution: Date: Introduction This paper discusses on the battle deaths. Under this, the paper tends to put into comparison the differences in the terms if death that occurred in the past centuries but the major factor that brings these deaths into a closer look and approach is that the deaths were as a result of the battles that were experienced in the past. It is quite important to reiterate the fact that in the past there were quite a number of wars and conflicts that led to the massive loss of lives that were realized by the various citizens, (Harry, 2008). In this paper therefore, it is important to note that the paper tends to discuss and envisage the differences that occurred in the past years in the battle deaths that were captured in the various data set records. Under this, the paper will therefore explore the differences that are quite vivid between the PRIO battle deaths dataset and the Uppsala battle-related deaths dataset. It is as well quite important to reiterate the fact that the paper will involve the use of charts and figures in the actual analysis of the data that are in the data set records. This will give an effective and actual difference that will clearly vindicate the authenticity and validity of the data that is in comparison, (Heidi, 2010). It is in order to bring to the attention of the various persons that these deaths were geographically distributed in the various locations in the world. Under this, it is important to highlight that these regions included the European continent where it was only Caucus state, Africa where it was Egypt affected, the Middle East countries that incorporated the Arabian countries and the American continent with only Caribbean state affected, (William, 2011). In the paper, three consecutive years were used for the comparison of the number of deaths. In this, the paper has taken 2004, 2006 and 2008 as the base years for the comparison. This will help in the true presentation of the actual mortality rates in the various years as well as identifying the core ways that can be used in the averting of these kinds of deaths in the various countries in question. In the first range of comparison, it is important to note that the paper has chosen the year 2004 in this case (Heidi, 2010). The paper now takes comparison of the year 2004 in the two records. Based on the available information that is presented in the year 2004, it can be noted that there is a great variation and difference in the number of deaths of the people in the various countries as recorded in the world records. According to the battle deaths data sheet the third version by PRIO, it is clearly noted that the number of deaths was 41012. On the other hand, it is clearly noted that the number of deaths according to the Uppsala battle-related deaths dataset which is on the fifth version was 30899, (William, 2011). From this, it can be clearly noted that the difference in the number of deaths is 10113. This is 24.66% of the total of the number deaths that occurred in 2004 according to the Uppsala records while it was 32.29% of the total number of deaths that were experienced according to the PRIO records. From this, it can be noted that the average death according to these two sources is 35956.this could translate to be the near actual value. This could be so due to the fact that there could be certain factors that could have not allowed the people or the resource persons to access all the vital and required information concerning the number of deaths in the various parts. These could be environmental factors, physical factors or insecurity too thereby forcing them to just use mere approximations and estimations, (Heidi, 2010). Graphical presentation of the deaths in 2004, retrieved from UCDP Battle-Related Deaths Dataset - Uppsala University, Sweden This could therefore prove that the records were therefore near accuracy or were accurate based on their various sources or data that they collected at the various places that they visited. Another year that is used in the comparison is 2006. Under this, it is important to highlight that the number of deaths were almost equal in the two records. In this year, it can be clearly noted that there was a wide discrepancy in the number of deaths of the various people as were recorded by the various persons or resource persons who were in place during the data collection exercise. It is important to highlight that there was a record of 19422 according to the Uppsala records while according to the PRIO; the records were quite high to 50000, (Heidi, 2010). Comparing this, it can be clearly noted that there was a difference of 30578. This was almost twice the number of deaths that was recorded by Uppsala. It is clear that the difference was a 57.44% increase on the number of deaths as recorded in the Uppsala records. On the other hand, it can be clearly noted that the difference was 61.16% of the deaths that was recorded by the PRIO data sources. It is important to highlight that based on the two records, it can be averaged and the value could the in that is perceived to be near accuracy in terms o the number of deaths. According to this, it can be noted that the average for the number of deaths in the two records is taken to be 34711. This could be the figure that is nearer to the actual figure (William, 2011) A chart that shows the deaths in 2006 and the difference with the other variable retrieved PRIO battle deaths dataset. In the last comparison, it is important to note that in 2008, the figure that was recorded by the PRIO was estimated to be 46000 while the figure that was recorded by the Uppsala was 22527. From these two records, it can be clearly noted that the difference is 23473. This was 51.03% of the PRIO record and 2.2% increased on the total number of deaths recorded by the Uppsala. The average death is 34264, (Harry, 2008) A bar graph showing the number of deaths in 2008, retrieved from Battle-related deaths (number of people) | Data | Table From these two sources, it can be clearly noted that there are a lot of discrepancies that have been encountered in the coming up with the data that was presented. It is therefore important to reiterate the fact that one methodology is better than the other. The appropriate methodology is the PRIO methods used in the coming up with the data (Ecclestone, 2010) References Ecclestone, K. (2010) Transforming Formative Assessment In Lifelong Learning, Boston, McGraw-Hill International, page 453. Harry, G. (2008) Formative Assessment: Responding to Your Students, UK, Eye On Education publishers, page 231. Heidi, A. (2010) Handbook of Formative Assessment, London, Routledge publishers, page 31. Wiliam D. (2011) Embedded Formative Assessment, UK, Solution Tree Press Publishers, page 243. Read More