The Economic Implications of Social Cohesion 2003
DOI: 10.3138/9781442681149-003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social Capital, Social Cohesion, Community: A Microeconomic Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although some authors consider social capital more relevant at an individual level (Bourdieu 1985;Portes 1998;Veenstra 2000;Dayton-Johnston 2003;Pevalin 2003) whereas others at collective level (Lochner et al 1999;Kawachi and Berkman 2000;McKenzie et al 2002;Szreter and Woolcock 2004) and the appropriate level at which it should be measured remains uncertain, the literature on social capital and health shows that differences in health could be better predicted by individual level social capital (De Silva et al 2005). We follow this approach and use an individual level measurement of SC.…”
Section: Social Capitalmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Although some authors consider social capital more relevant at an individual level (Bourdieu 1985;Portes 1998;Veenstra 2000;Dayton-Johnston 2003;Pevalin 2003) whereas others at collective level (Lochner et al 1999;Kawachi and Berkman 2000;McKenzie et al 2002;Szreter and Woolcock 2004) and the appropriate level at which it should be measured remains uncertain, the literature on social capital and health shows that differences in health could be better predicted by individual level social capital (De Silva et al 2005). We follow this approach and use an individual level measurement of SC.…”
Section: Social Capitalmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The literature identifies a number of means through which social cohesion and governmental effectiveness may directly facilitate increased productivity. For instance, they may facilitate coordination in complex production processes (Dayton-Johnson, 1999), lead to the diffusion and early adoption of new technology (Rogers, 1983), and enable more time to be spent on innovation rather than monitoring and enforcing contracts and property rights (Knack and Keefer, 1997). Mauro (1995) argues that efficient and honest institutions will facilitate the distribution of permits and licenses, thereby increasing the rate of technological progress.…”
Section: Social Economics and Social Capitalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Social solidarity and social harmony are therefore worth investment, and their leverage is attributable to their reduction of transaction cost (Stanley and Smeltzer 2003). Furthermore, the investment is valuable in boosting the return to social capital, characterized by potentially helpful social relationships (Dayton-Johnson 2003). Social capital is distinguishable from social solidarity and social harmony in that the former is the social resource drawn from social networks, whereas the latter are experiences and practices generating resources in society (Crow 2002;Friedkin 2004;Ostrom 2009).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%