The Europe 2020 Index

This paper presents a new index to quantify, measure and monitor the progress towards the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. This index is based on a set of relevant, accepted, credible, easy to monitor and robust indicators presented by the European Commission at the time the strategy was launched. The internal analysis of the index shows that the Smart and the Inclusive growth dimensions of the strategy are strictly correlated and that the trade-offs between each of these two dimensions and the Sustainable one exist but are decreasing, suggesting that a change towards more sustainable models of development is occurring in Europe. The external analysis of the index shows that it can be a valid measure to assess the overall competitiveness of countries and that the most critical factors for this strategy to be successful are good governance and social capital.     

Are Theories About Social Capital Empirically Supported? Evidence from the Farming Sector

Social capital is the bond that links societies together and without which there is little opportunity for economic growth or individual well-being. Thus, this paper aims to contribute to the literature by providing an analytically reliable concept of social capital and a methodological tool for empirically testing a theoretical model of how social capital is built. Based upon a decomposition of the concept of social capital characterising three main dimensions (i.e., structural, relational and cognitive), for each specific group of individuals under study the structural equation model allows us: (1) to confirm the multidimensional construct of social capital; (2) to measure the interrelation between its different attributes and; (3) to set a solid basis for additional research on the effects of social capital. This approach has been empirically applied to Andalusian (southern Spain) farmers as case study. We believe this research to be a fundamental starting point for informing social capital policymakers and helping them implement the necessary tools to facilitate sustainable development processes at different moments in time as it takes into account the multidimensional, contextual and dynamic nature of the concept.     

Political Distrust and Social Capital in Europe and the USA

Levels of rising political distrust in the USA and parts of Europe attracted political scientists’ attention in the 1990s, and urged them to look at possible consequences of this phenomenon for the functioning of democracies and social life. Approximately during the same period, from a sociological viewpoint, social capital theorists started studying the effects of declining social capital on political and economic life. In this article, we looked at the relationship between political distrust and social capital from an interdisciplinary perspective. We studied the relationship in six European countries from three regions (North-West, South and East), and the USA, and we were interested in the question of whether this relationship varies over the regions, or whether it is approximately the same everywhere. We used ISPP data from the 2004 wave, which included a range of social capital indicators and political distrust items. Social capital was subdivided into four dimensions, namely, networks (membership of organizations), interpersonal or social trust, social norms (citizenship norms), and linking social capital (political activities). First we studied the effect of political distrust on these four dimensions of social capital, while controlling for other variables such as political efficacy, political interest and a set of socio-structural background variables. One of our main findings was that the only significant effect of political distrust we found throughout all countries was a negative effect on one dimension of social capital, namely, interpersonal trust: the more people distrust politicians and people in government, the less they trust other people in general, even when controlled for all other variables. The reverse relationship led us to the same conclusion: the more people tend to trust people in general, the less they distrust politics, a result we found in all countries. This finding refutes the claim that there is no or either only a very weak relationship between political and social trust, as some have strongly argued before. Other important political attitudes connected to social capital were political interest and political efficacy, and for political distrust it was external efficacy. Significant socio-economic factors were religiousness and educational level for membership of voluntary organizations, educational level for interpersonal trust, religiousness for citizenship norms, and educational level and age for political activities. The reciprocal relationship was strongest in the USA and North-Western Europe, as were the explained variances of our (more extensive) regression models. In Southern and Eastern Europe other factors appear to be at work which influence both social capital and political distrust.     

The PEARL Model of Sustainable Development

This paper addresses perception (P), environment (E), action (A), relationship (R), and locality (L) as the social indicators of sustainable development (SD), the capital letters of which label the PEARL model. The paper refers to PEARL with regard to three aspects to elaborate the promises and limits of the model. Theoretically; it discusses comprehensiveness of the model. Pedagogically; it focuses on how the PEARL might facilitate learning, teaching and recalling fundaments of SD. Practically; it searches whether the model is appropriate for indexing and assessment. The PEARL brings out the significance of perceptions for SD and promises pedagogical contribution. The model, within this sense, appears as a qualitative understanding of SD which proposes a schematic framework to facilitate teaching and learning of its content. The analysis also points to likelihood of a quantitative PEARL index that is appropriate for assessment and measurement for individuals, institutions and regions.     

Modeling urbanism: Economic,social and environmental stress in cities

The time has come for urban social indicator research to converge with the basic substantive efforts of urban researchers. Such a convergence may propel both basic and applied researchers toward more fruitful outcomes. This paper argues that the traditional model of urbanism provides the medium for the convergence. When urbanism is conceptualized to be multidimensional, seemingly discreet indicators of demographic, economic, social, and environmental conditions in cities may be incorporated into a more general model of urban structure and change. Specifically, using social indicators for 195 cities from ZPG's Children's Stress Index and the 1990 U.S. Census, we show empirically: (1) Urbanism is a complex factor with four distinct dimensions: demographic scale, economic stress, social stress, and environmental stress. (2) These four dimensions of urbanism may be reliably measured with standard composite variables used in today's social indicator research. (3) Within the Urbanism factor there are causal connections among the separate dimensions, the most basic of which is that asserted by arguments from the traditional theory of urbanism; specifically, that population size, density, and social heterogeneity are causally linked to stress in economic, social, and environmental systems of the city.     

Welfare State Development in Latin America and the Caribbean (1970s–2000s): Multidimensional Welfare Index,Its Methodology and Results

There is an ongoing debate between focalization and universalization on welfare policies as the best way to develop the welfare state in Latin America and the Caribbean. However, there is a need to develop a measure that exhibits the multidimensional nature of the welfare state, instead of focusing on the social spending dimension. Segura-Ubiergo (The political economy of the welfare state in Latin America: globalization, democracy and development. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2007) constructed a welfare effort index (WEI) to facilitate understand the relative degrees of welfare state development among Latin American countries. The WEI focuses mainly on social spending and ignores the other dimensions of welfare. Based on a comparative analysis of 17 Latin American countries and following the methodology of Segura-Ubiergo, a new index that aims at enriching the WEI was constructed. The new index is multidimensional in that it has eight indicators relating to three dimensions of welfare: social spending, coverage of welfare programs and outcome of welfare institutions. Principal component analysis was used for reducing the indicators into three indexes that represent three proposed dimensions of welfare. The combination of these three indexes gives the multidimensional welfare index. The results of the index account for more than 75 % of the data variance.     

Family Demography,Social Theory,and Investment in Social Capital

The analytic models used by family demographers would be strengthened by the concept of social capital, placed in the context of social exchange theory. Using that concept to designate resources that emerge from social ties, the authors advance five propositions: 1) social capital is a multidimensional attribute of an individual; 2) the dimensions of social capital are the number of relationships a person has, their quality (strength), and the resources available through those relationships; 3) group membership and interaction facilitate the development of social capital; 4) the structural properties of groups influence the development of social capital; and 5) the acquisition and maintenance of social capital is a major motivator of human behavior. The formation of sexual partnerships, the birth and rearing of children, and both intragenerational and intergenerational transfers constitute major forms of investment in social capital in virtually all societies.     

Child Health-Related Quality of Life and Parental Social Capital in Greece: An Exploratory Study

In this paper, we examined dimensions of child health-related quality of life in Greece in relation to parental assessments of neighbourhood social capital and social support networks. For the analysis, two main measures were used: (1) child self-reported health-related quality of life in ten dimensions, as measured by the KIDSCREEN questionnaire; (2) subjective measures of parental neighbourhood social capital and social support. Parental assessments of neighbourhood social capital and social support were both independently and positively associated with child self-reported health-related quality of life. However, they were not associated with the same dimensions of child well being, nor were they associated with all dimensions of child well being. These results suggest that greater attention in future research needs to be paid to the differential associations between the various dimensions of social capital and child health-related quality of life, with clear focus implications for social and health policies.     

Explaining Unequal Levels of Social Capital in Tehran

Social capital may act as an asset to serve people in various situations. However, people do not equally enjoy the same level of social capital and there is inequality in distribution of this asset in societies. There is few research within the wider literature exploring the determinants of inequality in social capital. This study measured and decomposed inequality in the distribution of social capital in Tehran using a concentration index approach. Data was gathered through a survey in 2008, the sample included 2484 of over 18-year old residents. Social Capital Integrated Questionnaire was used to measure social capital status, its dimensions (networking, trust, and cooperation) and outcomes (cohesion and political action). Most of social capital dimensions/outcomes were unequally distributed in Tehran, favouring the rich. However, in terms of political action, the poor were more politically active than the rich in Tehran. Decomposition showed that economic status and education had the highest contributions to the observed inequalities. In efforts to move towards a more just society, these findings can inform future policies in Iran to tackle the observed inequalities in social capital.     

Social Capital or Social Cohesion: What Matters For Subjective Well-Being?

The theoretical analysis of the concepts of social capital and of social cohesion shows that social capital should be considered as a micro concept whereas social cohesion, being a broader concept than social capital, is a more appropriate concept for macro analysis. Therefore, we suggest that data on the individual level should only be used to analyze the relationship between social capital, social cohesion indicators and subjective well-being and that they do not allow commenting on the level of social cohesion in a society. For this last type of analyses aggregated indicators of social cohesion have to be computed which is not the issue of this paper. Our empirical analysis is based on individual data for Luxembourg in 2008. In general, our results suggest that investments in social capital generate monetary returns (increased income) and psychic returns (increased subjective well-being) even in a highly developed and multicultural country like Luxembourg. When we are adding on the micro level variables representing the economic domain of social cohesion following Bernard (1999), then we observe that this domain also has an effect on income and on subjective well-being. Therefore, we recommend including the economic domain in any future analysis using the concept of social cohesion.     

Does Human Development Index Provide Rational Development Rankings? Evidence from Efficiency Rankings in Super Efficiency Model

The human development index (HDI) rankings have provided a referenced measure for people to choose a country in which to travel or live. This paper employs a superefficiency model to evaluate the rationality of the HDI rankings of 19 evaluated OECD countries in 2009. Compared to the HDI rankings, the efficiency rankings measured by the super-efficiency model have the following two advantages: (1) they consider the inputs that are used to generate the indicators for constructing the HDI, and decide the weights of inputs and outputs endogenously; (2) the input slacks measured by the super-efficiency model can evaluate whether the inputs are over-used and provide the improvement path of each country’s input variables. Empirical result shows that approximately 75 % of the evaluated countries had rather different results in the efficiency rankings and the HDI rankings. Additionally, the input slack shows that roughly 70 % of sample countries over-used their capital per labor relative to their existing outputs (or the HDI).     

Country-Level Investment in Cultural Opportunity Structures. A Potential Source of Health Differences Between 21 European Countries

Individual’s participation in cultural activities may positively affect health through a pathway mediated by social capital. We examine whether country-level investment in cultural opportunity structures was associated with between-country differences in self-rated health and, if so, whether these associations were mediated by citizens’ confidence in societal institutions, i.e., by institutional trust, regarded as a dimension of social capital. For 24,887 respondents in the European Social Survey, 2006, data on self-rated health, institutional trust (individual-level and country-level), and sociodemographic variables were linked with statistics-based country-level data on 10 indicators of cultural opportunity structures and mediator variables (gross domestic product (GDP), Gini index, and welfare state regime). Over and above the sociodemographics, six cultural indicators contributed to between-country health differences in logistic multilevel regression analysis: the percentage of arts students, the RC index, the percentage of writers and creative artists of total employment, exports of cultural goods, imports of cultural goods, and the number of feature films produced per capita. Controlling, furthermore, for trust, and country-level mediators, only imports of cultural goods contributed to between-country differences in health. No associations with other cultural indicators remained after controlling for GDP or welfare state regime. Institutional trust may partially mediate the significance of cultural investments for self-rated health. However, both cultural investment and trust may be concomitants of general prosperity and welfare policies. Future studies should investigate whether the countries’ welfare policies influence the transformation of cultural investment into institutional trust and which types of indicators best depict associations between investments and health.     

The Social Indicators Movement at 50: Onwards in Unity or Divided?

Before we can move forward with new topics in quality of life research, it would be useful to settle a number of issues that have been a source of debate over the last 50 years. Broadly speaking, this leads to seven principles for measuring and describing quality of life: the central focus is on people; quality of life is about more than just economics; a full measurement must incorporate both objective and subjective indicators; quality of life incorporates several dimensions; the outcome must be viewed separately from the determinants; there must be attention for distribution and difference; the domains can be combined into an index (though this is not essential). The main debate is perhaps about whether or not there should be an index. An index is necessary if we wish to give social indicators the same status as economic indicators have through GDP. In my view, that is desirable. Once these principles are established, the agenda for future social indicators research can be shaped using a model-based approach incorporating several recommendations from Land and Michalos.     

Reporting Systems for Sustainability: What Are They Measuring?

The dominance of the neoliberal discourse in the sustainability debate has tended to privilege the economy over environment and social dimensions with implications for what is measured by sustainability monitoring systems. Moreover, systems to measure sustainability, including those influenced by neoliberal discourse, lack robust definitions and fail to address the interrelationship between social, economic and environmental contexts. If sustainability indicators are to help understand the interrelated forces driving change, by providing indications of sustainability, then the indicators should be derived from an epistemologically consistent conceptual framework which encapsulates clearly defined phenomena. The paper discusses whether sustainability indicators in the Australian context are derived from an epistemologically consistent framework. It is argued that the validity of current sustainability reporting systems is contestable.     

The Relationship Between Social Capital and Individualism–Collectivism in Europe

The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between social capital and individualism–collectivism in a sample of 50,417 individuals from 29 European countries using data from the European Social Survey Round 6 (2012). Social capital was measured in terms of generalized social trust and informal social networks; individualism–collectivism was operationalized via Schwartz’s Openness to Change–Conservation value dimension. Results from a hierarchical linear modeling analysis showed that less than 10% of variance in social capital indicators was found between countries, meaning that the level of social capital varies more substantively between individuals than between the countries. Openness to Change had a weak but statistically significant and positive relationship both with the indices of Generalized Social Trust and Informal Social Networks, which remained significant even when individual age, gender, education level, and domicile were controlled for. In sum, our findings show that the positive relationship between social capital and individualism that has been found at the cultural level also holds at the individual level: people who emphasize independent thought, action, and readiness to change are also more willing to believe that most people can be trusted and are more engaged in informal social networks. The relationship is, nevertheless, very weak and the strength of the association varies significantly across different European countries. This variation, however, cannot be explained by country differences in level of democracy or human development and the country’s wealth moderates only the individual level relationship between Openness to Change and Informal Social Networks. Our findings suggest that sources of social capital at the individual level can be found in people’s immediate social surroundings, as well as their everyday social interactions.     

Education Enrollment Level and Income Inequality: A Case of SAARC Economies

This article introduces ‘critical open-mindedness’ as a new sociological construct, which can be employed particularly in the studies of social attitudes and attitude change, social values, social identities, cross-cultural relations and social discrimination. By drawing on the data collected through the 2005 World Values Survey in Australia, we have operationalized the construct into an integrative social index, called ‘critical open-mindedness index’ consisting of five dimensional composite indicators (CIs; i.e. the social, political, cultural, economic, and environmental). We have adopted an integrative approach to constructing these composite indicators in which we pragmatically select and incorporate a variety of techniques with the purpose of maximizing the validity of the end results. The findings with respect to Australians’ critical open-mindedness, both in general and in reference to its five dimensions are discussed. We have also developed and examined a social psychological index of ‘socio-cognitive open-mindedness’ inspired by a number of commonly used international scales and by drawing on the same dataset. We have shown that these two types of open-mindedness are qualitatively different. Our analysis does not support the idea that individuals’ social psychological open-mindedness determines their critical open-mindedness. It is rather the opposite which is the case.     

Social Capital, Satisfaction and Quality of Life in the Workplace

This article is an empirical analysis of the relationship between social capital and satisfaction and quality of life in the workplace in Spain. Social capital has been defined as the set of cooperative relationships between social actors that facilitate collective action. This concept has been measured based on five dimensions: trust, social relations, commitment, communication and influence. An analysis has been carried out applying regression and causal models to determine the influence on satisfaction and quality of life at work of social capital dimensions and of characteristics of the worker, work environment and company or organization. The data is based on Spain's 2001 Quality of Life at Work Survey. The results of the analysis indicate that the models applied are significant, which confirms the examined propositions. Higher levels of social capital imply greater levels of satisfaction and quality of life at work. Social capital is a better predictor of quality of life at work and job satisfaction than the characteristics of the worker, the company or organization, and the work environment.     

Social Indicators and Living Conditions in the Netherlands

The Dutch Social en Cultural Planning Office(SCP) monitors social changes and socialservices, evaluates social policies, givesinformation about expected developments in thefuture and gives recommendations for furtherpolicy. Key issues are the assessment ofeconomic, demographic and social changes andthe influence of these factors on the socialand living conditions of the population. TheSCP uses social and economic indicators toexamine these developments. Besidesresearching specific themes (such as socialexclusion, the consequences of long-termunemployment, the social position of theelderly and use, costs and productivity ofsocial services) the SCP has developed anoverall monitoring tool for the livingconditions: the living conditions index (LCI).Nowadays the index is composed of indicatorswhich reflect conditions in eight areas:housing, health, consumer durables, leisureactivity, sport activity, socialparticipation, mobility and holiday. In thefuture, the SCP will attempt to develop aconceptual model that will link the livingconditions index to other social indices likelivability (housing and level of services),poverty and socioeconomic deprivation.     

Measurement and socio-demographic variation of social capital in a large population-based survey

Objectives The main objective of this study was to describe the variation of individual social capital according to socio-demographic factors, and to develop a suitable way to measure social capital for this purpose. The similarity of socio-demographic variation between the genders was also assessed. Data and methods The study applied cross-sectional data from the national Finnish Health 2000 survey (n = 8,028) which represents the adult population, aged 30 years and over. Several variables indicating social capital were condensed to dimensions on the basis of factor analysis. Participants were categorized into tertiles in each dimension of social capital by means of factor scores. The multinomial logistic regression model was used to produce the adjusted prevalences for the dimensions of social capital according to socio-demographic categories (age, gender, education, living arrangements, income, and type of region). Results Three dimensions of social capital were distinguished: social support, social participation and networks, and trust and reciprocity. Age had an inverse association with social support as well as participation and networks, and a curvilinear association between age and trust and reciprocity, the oldest age groups showing the highest level of trust. Married persons and those in the highest educational and income groups tended to have more social capital than other persons. Residents of urban and rural regions did not systematically differ from each other in their level of social capital although residents of urban regions participated less and showed less trust than people living in semi-urban or rural regions. Social support varied significantly with gender. The decline of social support by age was steeper in women than in men. Social participation and networks increased with education, the gradient appearing steeper among men. The difference between married and cohabiting men was substantial compared to women when it came to trust. Conclusions People who are young, married, educated, and well-off have plenty of social capital. This information might help various services to concentrate the actions on the people in danger of social exclusion. Our results also form a basis for the future by allowing the changes in social capital to be examined over time and over different studies.