1. 1 Social Capital – Theory, Measures, and Policy Bill Reimer with the NRE Team reimer@vax2.concordia.ca2005/07/26 Click on for the data behind the claims and View Notes Page for Speakers Notes

2. 2 How can rural Canada (re)vitalize? Identify the conditions that have contributed to devitalization Identify the conditions that have contributed to devitalization Organize assets and resources to do the things considered important Organize assets and resources to do the things considered important This ability to organize is: Capacity Capacity transforms assets into valued outcomes

3. 3 ASSETS Economic Capital Human Skills and Abilities Social Capital Natural Resources PROCESSES Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal OUTCOMES Economic wealth Social and political inclusion Social Cohesion Environmental security Social and self- worth Health Personal Security outcomes can become new assets and liabilities CAPACITY MODEL Return

4. 4 Context Matters exposure to global economies stability of the local economy adjacency to metro regions social and institutional capacity ASSETS Economic Capital Human Skills and Abilities Social Capital Natural Resources PROCESSES Market Bureaucratic Associative Communal OUTCOMES Economic wealth Social and political inclusion Social Cohesion Environmental security Social and self- worth Health Personal Security outcomes can become new assets and liabilities CAPACITY MODEL

5. 5 The NRE Sample Frame Low CapacityHigh Capacity LagLead LagLead Distant Adjac. Distant Adjac. Distant Adjac. Distant Adjac. Local Exposed Stable Fluctu- ating Stable 56169915 45710012 1351612 9454 3018165 198264 4412413251 154627175 Fluctu- ating Global Exposed

6. 6 NRE…The Rural Observatory …an International Network

7. 7 Social Capital One type of asset or resource (stock) One type of asset or resource (stock) Social assets potentially useful for outcomes Social assets potentially useful for outcomes Network structures Network structures  Bonding, bridging, linking, density, etc. Normative structures Normative structures  Market, bureaucratic, associative, communal relationships, networks, and associated norms that facilitate collective action Capacity Model

8. 8 Market Associative Communal Bureaucratic High Capacity = Agility with all systems The Type of Social Relation Matters

9. 9 How is social capital to be measured? Social capital is about social relations Social capital is about social relations Reflected in institutions, organizations, groups, events (AVAILABLE social capital) Reflected in institutions, organizations, groups, events (AVAILABLE social capital) Reflected in the USE of these groups and networks Reflected in the USE of these groups and networks Rooted in 4 types of social relations Rooted in 4 types of social relations

10. 10 Measuring AVAILABLE Social Capital Market relations: Enterprises, Financial institutions (formal and informal), commercial services Market relations: Enterprises, Financial institutions (formal and informal), commercial services Bureaucratic relations: Schools, Gov’t organizations, corporations Bureaucratic relations: Schools, Gov’t organizations, corporations Associative relations: Voluntary associations Associative relations: Voluntary associations Communal relations: Family networks, Daycares, Senior citizens’ centres, Religious organizations, Community-integration events Communal relations: Family networks, Daycares, Senior citizens’ centres, Religious organizations, Community-integration events Sites

11. 11 Measuring USE of Social Capital Market-based: Employment, M-Internet, market services, employment organizations, market support Market-based: Employment, M-Internet, market services, employment organizations, market support Bureaucratic-based: B-Internet, bureaucratic services, actions re. bureaucracies, bureaucratic support Bureaucratic-based: B-Internet, bureaucratic services, actions re. bureaucracies, bureaucratic support Associative-based: A-Internet, associative services, associative-based groups, associative actions, associative support Associative-based: A-Internet, associative services, associative-based groups, associative actions, associative support Communal-based: C-Internet, sharing goods, sharing services, family support Communal-based: C-Internet, sharing goods, sharing services, family support

12. 12 Are the normative structures related? Within Levels SitesSites: Market, Bureaucratic, Associative correlate Sites HHsHHs: Bureaucratic, Associative, Communal correlate HHs Across Levels Available social capital not always used.. Type of social capital matters.. Census proxies depend on type of social capital.. Policy: Third sector strategic choice for economy

13. 13 Does context have specific effects on production and use of social capital? Yes (more social capital use in): Yes (more social capital use in): Yes  Connected to global economy  Fluctuating local economy  Remote from metropolitan centres  Low institutional capacity  Socio-economic leaders Condition relationship between social capital and outcomes. Condition relationship between social capital and outcomes..

14. 14 Policy Implications Build from social capital strengths Build from social capital strengths  Social capitals are substitutable Organize for incompatibilities Organize for incompatibilities  e.g. Bureaucratic and Associative Adapt to local conditions Adapt to local conditions  Non-metro: Associative and Communal  Globally connected: Associative Develop multiple measures Develop multiple measures

15. 15 Social Capital Theory, Measures, and Policy The Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation nre.concordia.ca www.crrf.ca 2005/07/26 Become an investor today!

16. 16 NRE Field Sites by AVAILABLE Types of Social Capital Source: 19 NRE Site Profiles 2000 Return

17. 17 Correlation between Types of AVAILABLE Social Capital: Site-level BureaucraticAssociativeCommunal Market.76**.84**.29 Bureaucratic.87**.12 Associative.13 (r) 19 sites – raw sums with skewed variables logged ** p<.01 Source: NRE Site Profiles 2000 Return

18. 18 Correlation between Types of USE of Social Capital: HH-level Bureau.AssociativeCommunal Market.18.28.27 Bureau..37.41 Associative.29 (r) 1995 HHs – sums of logged items p<.01 Source: NRE HH Survey 2001 Return

19. 19 AVAILABLE Social Capital is not always USED AVAILABILITY of Social Capital (Site-level) USE of SoKp (HH-level) MarketBureau.Assoc.Comm.Total Market.12.08.21.15 Bureaucratic.22.13.35.29 Associative.20.09.28.22 Communal-.18.09.07.05* Total.19.12.32.25 (r) (N=1849) Unless otherwise indicated p<.01; * p<.05 Availability is measured at the site level (Source: NRE Site Profiles 2000) Use is measured at the household level (Source: NRE HH Survey 2001) Return

20. 20 Type of USE of Social Capital matters for HH Incomes Adj. R 2 =.37 Constant = $9102 N = 1697 Logged values for USE of social capital P <.05 Source: NRE HH survey, 2001 Total HH income Market, bureaucratic, communal, associative: indexes of types of social capital Education of the respondent HH Size: number of people in the household Return

21. 21 Census Proxies for Social Capital TotalMarketBureau.Assoc.Comm. LF Particip..45*.74* Median HH Income.66*.81**.52* % Gov’t Transfers -.73** % English MT.58**.70**.55*.60* IQV Visible Minorities.50*.58**.67** (r) (N=19) * p<.05; ** p<.01 Average social capital by site (Source: NRE HH Survey 2001; Statistics Canada, Census 2001) ReturnNext

22. 22 Use of Associative Social Capital by Census Proxy R 2 (Adj)=.56 R 2 (Adj)=.56 Census Variables: Census Variables:  IQV for Visible Minorities and others  % English Mother Tongue Average of Use of Associative social capital Average of Use of Associative social capital NRE HH Survey 2001 NRE HH Survey 2001 Return

23. 23 Perception vs. Behaviour-based Indicators of Social Cohesion MarketBureauAssoc.ComnlTotal Community Cohesion.10.11.25.18.24 Psychol. Cohesion.09.12.25.17.24 Attract- iveness.14.08.09 Neighbour- liness.13.08.15.20.21 (r) All correlations significant at.01 level (2-tailed) Source: NRE HH survey 2001: 1991 respondents Return

24. 24 Use of Social Capital by NRE Sample Frame Dimensions GlobalStableAdjac. Hi Cap. Leading Market.18**-.12**.18** Bureau. Assoc..05*-.06**-.06**.17** Comm..05*-.05*-.11** Total.10**-.10**-.05*-.05*.16** (r) (N=1995) * p<.05; ** p<.01 (confirmed by ANOVA) Use is measured at the site level (Source: NRE Site Profiles 2000) Return

25. 25 Context Important for Transforming Assets into Outcomes ( e.g. Income ) 3 4 46 35 22 11.35.43HiCap.LoCap.5 3 46 34 22 11.31.41 Metro Adj. N.Adj65 4 53 34 22 11.43.29Fluct.Stable3 55 64 43 22 11.35.42GlobalLocal6 5 4 3 2 1.37TotalAssoc. Comm. Bureau. HH Size Educ Market RR2RR2 Regression of HH Income on Social Capital, etc. under NRE Sample Frame conditions Ranks based on standardized coefficients Source: NRE HH Survey 2001 (1995 HHs) USE of social capital Return

26. 26 Market Associative Communal Bureaucratic High Capacity = Agility among systems

27. 27 What are the most appropriate levels of analysis for evaluating collective social capital? Depends on the purpose Depends on the purpose Our objective: Rural Revitalization Our objective: Rural Revitalization Strategy: Strategy:  Examine multiple levels (households, sites, regions, provinces, nation)  Examine social capital within and across levels What are the limits of aggregation of individual social capital for estimating collective social capital?

28. 28 Can communities be analyzed as “networks of networks”? Networks used in complex ways Networks used in complex ways  e.g. Health: Communal, Associative, Bureaucratic integration Low correlation between community as action and community as perception Low correlation between community as action and community as perception  e.g. social cohesion Policy: multiple strategies for social cohesion