Get started
Work

An empirical multilevel study of the relation between community level social cohesion indicators and individual social capital in Flanders, Belgium

Year: 2015
Type: dissertation
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: Social cohesion is introduced as an answer to the question “What holds societies together?” by academics, politicians and the public opinion. However, the proliferation of conceptualisations and operationalisations seems to have made social cohesion (too) broad, (too) vague, and (too) popular to handle. Contrary, disciplinary boundaries seem to have led to protectionism, disregarding social cohesion’s multi-disciplinary aspects. First of all, the conceptualisation and operationalisation of social cohesion at the community level is researched. Theory formation started in the early days of sociology when new social cleavages and changes - such as industrialisation and urbanization - appeared and a shift from pre-modern to modern communities was apparent. Sociologists such as Emile Durkheim (1893) and Ferdinand Tönnies (1887) tried to answer the question “What holds societies together?” by interpreting social cohesion in a more normative manner in pre-modern communities and in a more structural manner in modern communities. While Tönnies envisioned a clear shift in the content of social cohesion, Durkheim did not and emphasised that two types of social cohesion formed two faces of the same reality. At the end of the 20th century, again, new social cleavages and changes - such as globalisation and migration - created a renewed interest in social cohesion, as industrialised communities shifted to post-industrialised communities. Reviewing the multi-disciplinary literature on social cohesion, it is apparent that although starting from different angles, perspectives on social cohesion overlap and coincide into an umbrella concept, composed out of different dimensions. Using a case study of 308 Flemish communities, all perspectives and dimensions are operationalised and it is clear that theory and empirical research are not identical. The theoretical expectation of one single latent concept is not confirmed as the empirical findings show two types of social cohesion existing in the same post-industrialised community: a traditional type and a modern type of social cohesion. Next, the multilevel question is investigated whether there is a relation between community social cohesion and individual social capital. Both concepts are often regarded as the elixirs for the ills of society and positive relations between the two types of community social cohesion (traditional and modern) and the two elements of individual social capital (trust and participation) are expected. The empirical findings show the expected positive relations between modern social cohesion and trust, between traditional social cohesion and participation. However, they also show an unexpected negative relation between modern social cohesion and participation, and no relation between traditional social cohesion and trust. Again, there is not a clear and uniform confirmation of the existing theory. The results in this dissertation therefore lead to important reflections and new insights in social cohesion and social capital research. For instance, although the indicator of participation remains important to identify, the conclusion cannot be to lower the level of modern social cohesion to generate more active individuals with higher levels of social capital. Future research could therefore focus on the different aggregated levels in which social cohesion can be found, as different relations at different levels could interfere with each other: an individual’s participation behaviour can be triggered by modern social cohesion within one level of analysis, eliminating or even reversing the effect of modern social cohesion at another level of analysis.
Source: Lirias
Language: English
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2291756901
Cites: 351
Cited by: 1
Related to: 10