Bridging capital and social cohesion in an English village

Roy Greenhalgh 12th November, 2008

Context• A small English village of 900 inhabitants.

• Has a primary school, Anglican church, independent chapel, pub, community run shop and post office and village hall, and village field.

• Has a growing retired population with few young families and transitory professionals. Turnover of houses approx 5 to 7% p.a.

• Has full range of semi-skilled workers (quarry and farming) through to senior management in multimillion private sector and security sector.

• Mix of housing with 80% private, estate and housing association

2

3

Purpose of the study• A gradual change in age of population leads to change in

interest in joining/membership of voluntary local associations;

• Despite a low rate of influx of young families, involvement in voluntary village associations proves difficult;

• Village has a thriving, successful community owned and run village shop/post office.

• Surfaced question is:-

– Can small communities or informal groups with high social cohesion positively affect others with low social cohesion? If so, how?

Study design• A case study

• group numbers < 35 per group, therefore traditional quantitative approach inappropriate;

• Traditional sampling approaches inappropriate .. scale too small;

• Diffusion is an individual process;

• Need to maintain all the characteristics of each individual;

• A suitable philosophical approach is primarily “relational”;

• Analytical method is to use Network Analysis.

4

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, Ca, Sage.Scott, J. (1991). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London, Sage.

Brown, S. L. (2007). "The adoption and implementation of a service innovation in a social work setting - a case study of family group conferencing in the UK." Social Policy and Society 6(3): 321-332.

The broad issues• “Social cohesion is a state of affairs .... amongst members of

society as characterised by a set of attitudes and norms that include trust, a sense of belonging and willingness to participate and help as well as their behavioural manifestations” (p.290);

• Bridging capital is outward looking, requiring a wide network of less dense relationships with far fewer multiplex strands ;

• Bridging and bonding capital’s strength can be measured in terms of weak to strong ties (Granovetter);

• Theorised that an increase in cohesion is brought about by an increase in deployment of bridging capital.

Chan, J., H.-P. To, et al. (2006). "Reconsidering Social Cohesion : Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research " Social Indicators Research 75: 273–302.

Granovetter, M. (1973). "The Strength of Weak Ties." American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360-1380.5

Method• Relational – “qualitative plus”

– Qualitative – questionnaires with supplementary semi-structured interviews to verify and extend known knowledge.

• 3 organisations

– Village shop – 31 members;

– WI committee – 6 members;

– Parish Council – 6 members .

Cross, R. and A. Parker (2004). The Hidden Power of Social Networks. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press.Borgatti, S. (2007). "structure of SNA questionnaires." from http://www.insna.org/.

Wasserman, S. and K. Faust (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 6

Method (2)

• Indicators

– A measure of :-

• the network in which subjects lived;

• the reciprocity between subjects;

• the trust between subjects;

• the manner in which social norms operated between subjects;

• how social agency appeared to work.

Leonard, R. and J. Onyx (2003). "Networking Through Loose and Strong Ties: An Australian Qualitative Study." Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 14(2).

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, Ca, Sage. 7

The Questionnaires

8

Response matrix

9

Id # key holder cash upphone orders

write orders (have resp)

Member of orgs officer

# of other orgs

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

10 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 5

15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7

25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

30 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

35 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6

40 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3

45 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2

The distribution of ties at level “I know very well” between helpers and supervisors

10

1

3

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

52

55

60

65

68

70

75

80

85

90

92

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

Density = 0.18,

SD =0.38

At level 2,3 & 4,

Density = 0.94

With SD = 0.244.

Frequency of working together, 1, 2 or monthly

11

1

510 15

20

25

30

45

50

52

55

65

75

80100

105

110

120

125

135

Distribution of shop helpers/supervisors who are members of and office holders in other village organizations

12

1

3510

15

20

25

30 35 40

4550

52

55

60

65

68

70

75

80

85

90

92100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

Shop post holder

Member of orgs

Officer of orgn

Findings - shop workers• Cohesion amongst the shop workers is high (d=0.94);

• Correlation between “How often do you work with these helpers?” with a subset (reply value of 2) of “How well do you know these helpers?” (r=0.34, sig <0.001) indicates a situation where staff can continue to get to know each other;

• High network connectivity facilitates easy flow of resources throughout the network;

• Ratio of strong ties to all ties (0.18:0.94) is healthy and shows there is no potential “lock-out” of new members;

• There is a wide spread of involvement in other village organisations.

Wellman, B. (1979). "The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yorkers." American Journal of Sociology 84(5 ): 1201-1231.

13

Involvement of supervisors and helpers in other village organisations

14

5

20

30

45

55

68

80

100

120

130

St Andrew's church

WI

MU

Bell ringers

Horticultural

Skittles

Hall

CLinC

Book reading

Ramblers

Parish Council

Senior Citizens

School governors

Poor Allotment

10

15

25

35

40

50

52

60

65

70

75

85

90

92

110

115

125

135

St Andrew's church

PTA

WI

MU

Bell ringers

Horticultural

Skittles

Hall

CLinC

Book reading

Ramblers

Parish Council

Senior Citizens

Speedwatch

Leyhill Dominoes

Findings – WI committee • Network values for the committee show high cohesion

(d=0.99) and in-out degree at 1.0 for all officers;

• High trust and high reciprocity exist, with good “obligation debtedness”;

• High involvement in other village organisations, with equally high officer membership;

• Local branch have regular group and national meetings with opportunities to bridge to out-of-village WI organisations;

• Some committee members do “bridge” to non-WI organisations in and out of village.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology 94: 95-120. 15

Conclusions• Successful bridging has been an individual social

activity;

• Bridging is risky;

• Most bridgers are professional class in-comers;

• Initial moves were to develop vulnerable weak-weak ties;

• Some weak-weak ties have changed into stronger ties;

• It is the learned professional skills that have been the basis for bridging skills.

16

References (1)• (2003). "Ethical Guidelines." Retrieved 21 Sept. , 2007, from www.the-sra.org.uk.

• Beauvais, C. and J. Jenson (2002). Social Cohesion: Updating the State of the Research. Ottawa, Canadian Policy Research Networks.

• Beauvais, C. and J. Jenson (May 2002). Social Cohesion: Updating the State of the Research. Ottawa, Canadian Policy Research Networks.

• Borgatti, S. (2007, 24 September 2007). "A question re your paper "Towards ethical guidelines for network research".”

• Borgatti, S. (2007). "structure of SNA questionnaires." from http://www.insna.org/.

• Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, et al. (2002). UCInet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Vsn 6. Harvard, MA:, Analytic Technologies.

• Bryman, A. and D. Cramer (1994). Quantitative Data Analysis for Social Scientists. London, Routledge.

• Chan, J., H.-P. To, et al. (2006). "Reconsidering Social Cohesion : Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research " Social Indicators Research 75: 273–302.

• Churchill, E. F. and C. A. Halverson (2005). "Social Networks and Social Networking." IEEE Internet Computing September - October: 14-19.

• Coleman, J. S. (1988). "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology 94: 95-120.

• Cross, R. and A. Parker (2004). The Hidden Power of Social Networks. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press.

• Fent, T., P. Groeber, et al. (2007). "Coexistence of Social Norms based on In- and Out-group Interactions." ACS - Advances in Complex Systems 10(2 ): 271-286.

 

•  17

References (2)• Granovetter, M. (1973). "The Strength of Weak Ties." American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360-1380.

• Granovetter, M. (1983). "The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited." Sociological Theory 1: 201-233.

• Hampton, K. and B. Wellman (2001). "Long Distance Community in the Network Society: Contact and Support Beyond Netville." American Behavioral Scientist 45: 476-495.

• Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping Social Cohesion: The State of Canadian Research. Ottawa, Canadian Policy Research Networks.

• Krackhardt, D. and M. Kilduff (2002). "Structure, culture and Simmelian ties in entrepreneurial firms." Social Networks 24 279–290.

• Lauman, E. O., P. V. Marsden, et al. (1989). The Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis. Research Methods in Social Network Analysis. L. C. Freeman, D. R. White and A. K. Romney. Fairfax, Va., George Mason University.

• Leonard, R. and J. Onyx (2003). "Networking Through Loose and Strong Ties: An Australian Qualitative Study." Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 14(2).

• Onyx, J. and P. Bullen (2000). "Measuring social capital in five communities." The Journal of Applied Behavioural Science 36(1): 23-42.

• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York, Simon & Schuster.

• Rajulton, F., Z. R. Ravanera, et al. (2007). "Measuring Social Cohesion: An Experiment using the Canadian National Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating." Social Indicators Research 80: 461-492.

•

•18

References (3)• Rousseau, D. M., S. B. Sitkin, et al. (1998). "Not too different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust."

Academy of Management Review 23(3): 393-404.

• Scott, J. (1991). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London, Sage.

• Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London, Sage.

• Smith, A. and L. Sparks (2000). "The role and function of the independent small shop: the situation in Scotland." The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 10(2): 205-226.

• Wallace, M. and A. Wray (2006). Critical reading and writing for postgraduates. London, Sage Publications.

• Wasserman, S. and K. Faust (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

• Wellman, B. (1979). "The Community Question: The Intimate Networks of East Yorkers." American Journal of Sociology 84(5 ): 1201-1231.

• Wellman, B. (1983). "Network Analysis: Some Basic Principles." Sociological Theory 1: 155-200.

• Williams, C. (2003). "Harnessing Social Capital: Some Lessons from Rural England." Local Government Studies 29(1): 75-90.

• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, Ca, Sage.

19