CC BY
44
Section 5. Sociology
Kizilova Kseniya, Institute for Comparative Survey Research
Vienna, Austria
Secretary of the World Values Survey Association E-mail: ksenniya.kizilova@gmail.com Haerpfer Christian W, Prof. Dr. of Political Science Department of Political Science University of Vienna President of the World Values Survey Association E-mail: christian_haerpfer@univie.ac.at
Social capital as the factor of societal transformations in post-communist societies
Abstract: paper deals with the analysis of the impact of social capital on the democratic transition in countries of post-Soviet Eurasia. Social capital is considered as a multidimensional concept with generalized trust, interpersonal trust, confidence in social and political institutions, organizational membership and social norms considered as its main components. The data used for the analysis comprises from the World Values Survey wave 6 (2010-2014), with Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan being included into the analysis. Multivariate analysis is used to define the domains of life and spheres of public life which are affected by social capital.
Keywords: social capital, generalized trust, institutional trust, post-Communist transformations
Since the last three decades, social capital as mance and development of the national economy
system [3]. Social capital enhances political involvement of citizens and facilitates implementation of collective action within the communities as well as contributes to a more effective cooperation of actors of the political system [5]. Some studies have proved the positive effect of social capital to reduce crime and to improve the health of community members [6].
The aim of this paper is to analyze the level of social capital in Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia and Russia, Moldova and other CIS countries and to study the effects of different forms of social capital for the development of societies in transition, in particular their economic and political system.
the theoretical concept and the subject of empirical research has been possessing one of the central places in social science. According to the definition of the World Bank, "social capital brings together institutions, relationships and norms that shape the quality and quantity of social interactions in the society" [1]. Increasing interest to the concept of social capital is linked to its claimed extensive potential in explaining phenomena and processes of social life: a number of studies have confirmed importance of social cohesion for country's sustainable socio-economic development [2, 4]. Social capital has received special attention due to its significant impact on the economic perfor-
The idea of social capital goes back to the concepts of economists Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx as well as sociological and political theories ofA. de Tocqueville, Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Georg Simmel. Development of "social capital" as an independent and coherent sociological concept started in Western sociology in the 1980s in the works of Pierre Bourdieu. Subsequently, the concept of social capital has received a complete review in the works ofJ. Coleman, R. Putnam, and F. Fukuyama. The works of these "classics" of social capital theory inspired further development of this concept by J. Sensenbrenner, S. Knack, P. Keefer, M. Woolcock and others. Sources of social capital are discussed in detail in the works of A. Portes. The greatest contribution to the study of the structural nature of social capital has been made by M. Grannovetter, R. Burt, N. Lin who represent the network analysis tradition. Essential contribution to the analysis of social capital and its effects for national development in post-Soviet countries has been made by R. Rose and C. Haerpfer who analysed the influence of social capital on social and political transformations, public health and population well-being [7].
Analyzing social capital in transitional societies, and R. Rose and C. Herpfer noted that Communist system encouraged creation of informal networks and connections between people which at the same time served as a mechanism to substitute functions of formal institutions [8]. The legacy of the communist system for the social capital development in post-Soviet societies was proved to be dual. On one hand, it facilitated establishment of high levels of interpersonal trust and extensive horizontal networks. On the other hand, the level of confidence in formal institutions, especially those represented by public and state bodies, remained very low, which negatively affected development of formal social capital in the CIS countries in the era of independence.
Period of reforms in post-Soviet countries in the 1990s also had an ambiguous impact on the level of social capital in these societies. Specific feature of the post-Communist transition is in its threefold nature: this was not only political transformation of the totalitarian regime into a pluralistic democ-
racy, but also transformation of the state-planned economy into the free market economy, as well as the transformation of the authoritarian societal system into a civil society with free associations. The period of transition, accompanied by a series of social, economic and political crises, contributed to a greater individualization and isolation of individuals which also prevented development of trust and social capital.
In the current research social capital is defined by the authors as a set of qualitative characteristics — norms, regulations, social networks and trust — that increase the effectiveness of social interaction and social exchange. Like other forms of capital (cultural, financial), social capital is a cumulative resource: the emergence of these characteristics is associated with the historical and cultural development of the society. Positive dynamics in the level of social capital is associated with establishment of new or modification of existing social norms, change in the level of confidence in social and political institutions, emergence of new types of free associations.
Current research is considering various forms of social capital differentiating between bonding and bridging social capital as well as formal and informal social capital. Informal social capital refers to the degree of attachment (or inclusion) to the social environment of the individual and is determined by the size and density of social networks (the existence and nature of the relationship) and the level of interpersonal trust (trust in a narrow circle of family, friends and personal acquaintances). At the group level, informal social capital characterizes the degree of cohesion of the group. Formal or vertical social capital is characterized by inclusion of the individual or a group into the broader social context — social structure of the society, and is determined by the level of institutional trust, membership in organizations and free associations, acceptance of existing group or community social norms. Two forms of social capital — interpersonal trust and membership in organizations — are borderline forms and can be attributed to both the formal and informal social capital. The determining factors in this case will be the semantic loading which is imposed on the category of trust, as well
as membership in organizations (entirely voluntary, mandatory or actively encourage the norms of public morality).
Main analytical method applied is multivariate analysis which allows to study the effects of different forms of social capital for societal development. Social capital is considered as a multidimensional phenomenon; a set of indicators is developed to measure its different components (independent variables): generalized trust; interpersonal trust to inner circle; interpersonal trust to outer circle; confidence in social institutions; confidence in political institutions; organizational membership; social norms. As dependent variables, we will use a set of indicators from the 6th wave of the WVS that characterize political, economic and social development of countries in the opinion of their population: level of happiness; subjective life satisfaction; self-reported health status; economic well-being; constitutional state; democratic political system in the country; civic participation of the population; as well as some objective indicators: GDP per capita (World Bank); Government Effectiveness (Worldwide Governance Indicators); Control of corruption (Worldwide Governance Indicators).
Main findings of the analysis indicate that informal or bonding social capital is prevailing in postsoviet societies. The levels of trust towards family members, neighbors and members of the community (3.2-3.3 on a 4-point scale) are much higher than trust towards strangers (1.8-2.1 on a 4-point scale) and institutional trust (2.3-2.6 on average on a 4-point scale). Higher level of trusts towards family and community members is a trend relevant for many world regions, however, the big gap in trust towards the inner-circle and generalized trust to people is a specific feature of the post-Soviet culture. This contributes to higher social cohesion of communities and small social groups, however, obstructs development of formal or bridging social capital
which is important for development of the solid societal system. It is proved that organizations and associations representing interests of citizens and therefore occupying the "intermediate" level in the society between the citizens and the government, are very weak and the so-called effect of "hourglass society", as described by R. Rose and C. Haerpfer, continues to exist in post-Soviet societies nowadays.
Informal social capital has positive correlation with population life satisfaction (.044) and the feeling of happiness (.058); it also contributes to conventional political participation of citizens (.098). At the same time, the negative impact of stronger informal networks and community cohesion in postSoviet societies is observed for the GDP growth (-.137) and development of the constitutional state (-.034) and could be explained as the consequence of still existing practice when informal social networks are used to substitute or facilitate public services. Generalized trust the opposite has positive correlation with GDP level (.127), control over corruption (.115) and efficiency of government work (.181). Institutional trust has the biggest impact on development of the constitutional state (.402) and democratic government (.421). Influence of social capital on economic development in post-Soviet societies, comparing to the developed western economies, is much lower.
Inclusion into formal networks, nongovernmental organizations and free associations, has a positive correlation and therefore positive contribution to the most domains of individual's life: the level of income (.099), happiness (.071), life satisfaction (.063), health (.056). At the societal level, there is a positive correlation between organizational membership and establishment of the constitutional state (.037), democratic government (.030). Organizational membership has positive correlation with unconventional political participation (.125) which is important for development of civic culture and democratic political system.
References:
1. Grootaert, C., Bastelaer, T. Understanding and Measuring Social Capital: A Synthesis of Findings and Recommendations from The Social Capital Initiative. Social Capital Initiative Working Paper No. 24, the World Bank, 2001.
2. Knack, S., Keefer, P. Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107, 1997, P. 1252-1288.
3. Woolcock, M. Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy frame-work. Theory and Society, 27, 1998, P. 151-208.
4. Dasgupta P. and Serageldin I. (eds.), Social Capital. A Multifaceted Perspective, Washington D. C., The World Bank, 1999.
5. Putnam, R. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993.
6. Rose, R. "How Much Does Social Capital Add to Individual Health? A Survey Study of Russians." Social Science and Medicine 51/9, 2000, P. 1421-1435.
7. Rose R., Mishler W., and C. Haerpfer. Social capital in civic and stressful societies. Studies in Comparative International Development, 32 (3), 1997, P. 85-111.
8. Haerpfer, C. et all. Social Capital in Transition: A First Look at the Evidence. Czech Sociological Review, 38, 2002, N 6, P. 693-720.
