1 / 18

Social Capital and CEIP

Social Capital and CEIP. A clear and measurable definition. Social capital and CEIP. 1. Introduction to noted forms of capital 2. Social capital – The concept 3. Model of social capital formation 4. Mechanisms by which CEIP might influence social capital

calida
Download Presentation

Social Capital and CEIP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social Capital and CEIP A clear and measurable definition

  2. Social capital and CEIP 1. Introduction to noted forms of capital 2. Social capital – The concept 3. Model of social capital formation 4. Mechanisms by which CEIP might influence social capital 4. Measurement of social capital in CEIP

  3. Introduction:Noted forms of capital • Physical • Cultural • Human • Social

  4. Social Capital • Jacobs (1961) first to provide evidence of the importance of concept to well functioning society • More recent interest through the work of Bourdieu (1986) Coleman (1988) and Putnam (1993, 2000) • Despite considerable interest confusion has arisen over concept

  5. Social Capital:Conceptual Ambiguity • van der Gaag and Saunders (2002) see social capital as a multidimensional concept • Social capital has aspects on both individual (micro) and collective (macro) level • Research has taken place on two different levels • Macro - level research tends to see social capital aligned to civil society - Referring to informal or voluntary social organizations • Micro - level research tends to see social capital rooted in social networks

  6. Social Capital:Definitions relevant to CEIP • CEIP adopts micro level explanation of social capital • Johnson (2003) believes to possess social capital a person must be related to others through a network • In this sense social networks convey social capital • A social network can be as simple as a link between two individuals

  7. Model of social capital formation • Adopting a definition of social capital that draws on a micro-level explanation that emphasizes the role of social networks allows social capital to be measured separately from outcomes • Social capital as networks has not been formally modeled until now – model allows measurable aspects of network formation to be clearly defined • Model recognizes relationships can be both beneficial and costly and that individuals will sever relationships according to cost and benefit • As network links are formed individuals begin to accumulate social capital

  8. Net benefit of a connection function of six factors • Presence of a pairwise link • Value of the link in the current period • Social capital in the link • Reputation of contacts • Congestion of contacts • Cost of linking

  9. Implications on social network formation • Model has clear implications for network formation – size, homogeneity, and density • In essence size, homogeneity, and density are clearly definable aspects of social networks that can be measured separately from outcomes on, for example labour market experiences and quality of life • Less dense and less homogeneous networks should help individuals ‘confront poverty, vulnerability, resolve disputes, and/or take advantage of new opportunities.’ (Woolcock and Narayan 2000)

  10. Mechanisms by which CEIP might influence social capital: Participants • Income stabilization should mean individuals are more reliable in meeting the maintenance costs of their relations • Succession of work placements offers opportunities for contact with broad range of people; • those involved in CEIP – other participants, project sponsors, training organizations • members of community at large through outputs of projects • CEIP has potential to increase network size and establish less dense and more heterogeneous networks among program group members

  11. Mechanisms by which CEIP might influence social capital: Participant movement • Movement increases likelihood of social capital enhancement among program group members • 64% have worked in more than one placement • 26% have had two positions • 38% have had three or more placements

  12. Mechanisms by which CEIP might influence social capital: Community Members • Brining individuals together who might not meet otherwise: • Members of volunteer boards • Individuals from sponsoring organizations • Members of community at large • Networks evolve through process of mobilizing for CEIP and output of projects developed • CEIP has potential to increase network size and establish less dense and more heterogeneous networks among community members

  13. Types of social capital enhanced • Specifically CEIP has potential to enhance bonding, but more importantly bridging, and linking social capital of program group and community members • Bonding social capital tends to be inward looking and reinforces homogenous groups • Bridging social capital refers to relations with distant friends and associates • Linking social capital refers to relations between different social strata in a hierarchy where power, social status and wealth are assessed by different groups. (Cote 2001)

  14. Measuring social capital in CEIP: Baseline and Follow up Surveys • Experiences of program and control group members assessed through baseline and follow up surveys • Surveys conducted at baseline, 18, 40 and 54 months • Surveys include social capital module where participants are asked about the characteristics of their networks • Allows us to assess the evolution of social networks over time

  15. Measuring social capital in CEIP: Social Capital module • To determine size of networks the baseline and follow up surveys ask a number of questions designed to elicit a list of contacts in relation to help with household activities, specialized advice, emotional support, and help finding a job • To determine homogeneity of networks the baseline and follow up surveys ask a number of questions about the characteristics of each contact such as age, gender, education level, area of residence, common religious beliefs, and political affiliation • To determine density of network connections program and control group members are queried in baseline and follow up surveysas to how well their contacts know each other

  16. Measuring social capital in CEIP: EI sample • On average EI sample members had 10 contacts they could rely on for help: • 6 contacts on whom they could call for help with household tasks, 5 for emotional help, 4 for help finding a job, and 3 for specialized advice • Most EI sample members share some similar characteristics with their network of contacts • EI sample members have relatively dense networks • No difference at baseline between program and control group members Not for Publication or Citation

  17. Measuring social capital in CEIP: IA sample • On average IA sample members had 8 contacts they could rely on for help: • 4 contacts on whom they could call for help with household tasks, 5 for emotional help, 3 for help finding a job, and 3 for specialized advice • IA sample members have homogeneous networks of contacts • The vast majority of the contacts of IA sample members knew each other • No difference at baseline between program and control group members Not for Publication or Citation

  18. Measuring social capital in CEIP: Community Survey • Longitudinal community survey administered in three waves to random selection of members in all 12 research communities – 5 CEIP, 8 comparison • Social networks of community members measured through community survey – size, homogeneity, and density

More Related