1

A Continental Divide?Social capital in the US and EuropePippa Norris and James Davis

Harvard University and NORC

2Structure

I. Theoretical framework

II. Data and evidence

III. The distribution of social capital

IV. Generational trends

V. Conclusions

3I. Theories of social capital Social capital “Connections among

individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them.” Social CapitalSocial Capital

Generalized reciprocityGeneralized reciprocity Social ConnectednessSocial Connectedness

Social TrustSocial Trust Social toleranceSocial tolerance Formal membershipsFormal memberships Informal social networksInformal social networks

4Putnam’s Claims:

Social networks and trust matter for societal cooperation

Social capital has consequences for democracy

Social capital has declined in post-war America

5Declining social trust, US

2000199619931990198819861983197819751972

% "

Mo

st

pe

op

le c

an

be

tru

ste

d"

.60

.50

.40

.30

.20

.10

0.00

Note: Q. “Do you think that most people can be trusted, or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people?” % agreeing that ‘Most people can be trusted’Source: US General Social Survey, 1974-1994

6Associational members, US 1974-94

19941991198919871984198019771974

% W

ho

are

me

mbe

rs

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

0.0

POLCLUB

UNION

SPORT

HOBBY

LIT/ART

PROF

CHURCH

Sport

Politics

Church

Note: The percent of Americans who report that they are members of a political club, a labor union, a sports club, a hobby club, a literary or art group, a professional society or a church group. These associations were selected for comparison as functionally equivalent to the list of associations included in the ESS. Source: US General Social Survey, 1974-1994

7US Trends, GSSInformal

SociabilityAssociational Membership

Social Trust

First year of series 1974 1972 1974

Latest year 2002 1994 2002

Data points 18 15 20

Number of cases 25,936 19,688 29,669

Standardized regression coefficients

Models A: Year -.025** -.008 -.070**

Models B: Year dummies -.038** -.032** -.090**

Models C:

Year

Birth cohort

-.207

.396

-.003

-.011

.000

-.153**

Source: US General Social Survey 1972-2002

8Key questions:

Has social capital eroded in Europe? Parallel social trends e.g.

Rise of TV entertainment Changing roles of women and men Suburban sprawl

Or is social capital different in Europe? Path-dependent

Role of the state Cultural traditions eg role of unions, churches etc Impact of Communism on civil society

9

II: Data and evidence

10Surveys

European Social Survey 2002 15 nations 1st release (EES-15)

Nordic Sweden, Norway, Finland

Northern Europe Britain, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland

Mediterranean Europe Greece, Spain, Portugal, Israel

Central Europe Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia

U.S. General Social Survey

11Age difference due to…

Linear social trends Formative experiences & social change

Curvilinear patterns Life cycle effect from early to middle age then

retirement Period effects

Decisive events eg fall of Berlin wall Contrasts by type of society

12

III: The distribution of social capital

13III: Associational membership, EES-15

21

20

15

13

12

10

8

6

6

5

5

4

0 10 20 30 40 50

Sports club

Trade Union

Consumer/automobile

Cultural/ hobby

Religious/Church

Social club

Professional/business

Other

Educational

Humanitarian/human rights

Political Party

Environmental/peace

Member Active Donate Vol-Work

Note: “For each of the voluntary organizations I will now mention, please use this card to tell me whether any of these things apply to you now or in the last 12 months, and, if so, which.” Source: European Social Survey 2002. Pooled sample. Weighted by dweight.

14Social capital in EES-15, 2002

SOCIAL TRUST SCALE

201816141210

ME

AN

AS

SO

CIA

TIO

NA

L M

EM

BE

R

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0.0

REGION

Postcommunist Europe

Southern Europe

Northern Europe

Nordic

Rsq = 0.8460

Slovenia

Sw eden

PortugalPoland

Norw ay

Netherlands

Israel

Ireland

HungaryGreece

GB Finland

SpainCzech Rep

High social capital

Low social capital

Note: The mean level of membership in 12 types of voluntary association and the mean score on the Social Trust scale by nation. Source: European Social Survey 2002 Weighted by dweight.

15

IV: Generational trends

16

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5

20.0S

oci

al t

rust

Switzerland Czech Republic Spain Finland

United Kingdom Greece Hungary Ireland

Israel Netherlands Norway Poland

Portugal Sweden Slovenia

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5

20.0

So

cia

l tru

st

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5

20.0

So

cia

l tru

st

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5

20.0

So

cia

l tru

st

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

Social trust by cohort of birth, ESS-15 2002

<< Older to younger >>

17

Social tolerance by cohort of birth, ESS-15 2002

<< Older to younger >>

Switzerland Czech Republic Spain Finland

United Kingdom Greece Hungary Ireland

Israel Netherlands Norway Poland

Portugal Sweden Slovenia

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0so

c to

l

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

soc

tol

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

soc

tol

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

soc

tol

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

18

Informal social meetings by cohort ESS-15 2002

<< Older to younger >>

3

4

5

6

Fre

q. s

ocia

l mee

tin

gs

Switzerland Czech Republic Spain Finland

United Kingdom Greece Hungary Ireland

Israel Netherlands Norway Poland

Portugal Sweden Slovenia

3

4

5

6

Fre

q. s

ocia

l mee

tin

gs

3

4

5

6

Fre

q. s

ocia

l mee

tin

gs

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

3

4

5

6

Fre

q. s

ocia

l mee

tin

gs

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

19

Associational membership ESS-15, 2002

<< Older to younger >>

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Vo

l Mem

be

rs

Czech Republic Spain Finland United Kingdom

Greece Hungary Ireland Israel

Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal

Sweden Slovenia

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Vo

l Mem

be

rs

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Vo

l Mem

be

rs

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Vo

l Mem

be

rs

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0

Cohort

20V: Conclusions

1. Major inequalities in social capital: Northern Europe v. Southern and post-Communist Europe

2. Social trust similar among young and old in many countries, but some fall by age in English-speaking and Nordic states

3. Social tolerance and informal networks stronger among young

4. Associational membership is a life-cycle effect, greatest among the middle-aged.

5. Contrasting patterns in the US and Europe

http://naticent02.uuhost.uk.uu.net