Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Social Capital of Welfare States and Its Significance for Population Health

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Global Perspectives on Social Capital and Health

Abstract

The Nordic welfare model, characterized by comprehensive welfare programs and generous welfare benefits, is suggested to provide several positive externalities for society and its citizens. Many of the features of the universal Nordic welfare state, such as low income inequality and poverty, could, however, also be important for the creation and maintenance of social capital. Nevertheless, there are also fears that features of universal welfare states deplete social capital.

Although previous studies show that social capital is strongly related to health and well-being most previous research in the field of social capital and health has focused on pure associations and ignored the significance of the broader institutional and political context for the creation and maintenance of social capital and its potential health consequences.

Using findings from cross-national European data from the European Social Survey (ESS), a first objective of this chapter is to scrutinize whether there are theoretical and empirical support that favors the “crowding out” hypothesis. Another objective of this chapter is to show some empirical evidence concerning whether levels of social capital in countries with different institutional characteristics and welfare policy also promote the overall health of societies.

The empirical data presented in the chapter chiefly shows that comprehensive welfare states do not seem to crowd out social capital. Universal welfare states of the Nordic model has the highest levels of social capital while lower levels were found in less comprehensive welfare states such as the Mediterranean and post-socialist countries. Positive correlations between total spending on social protection and levels of social capital also confirmed these findings, that is, countries that spend more on social protection have higher levels of social capital.

Furthermore, some final empirical findings in the chapter suggested that dimensions of social capital were associated with life expectancy at country level. Hence, countries with higher levels of social capital seem to have better population health. The analyses for instance suggested that countries included in the post-socialist regime type generally had low levels of social capital and low life expectancy, while social-democratic countries had very high levels of social capital and high life expectancy. By studying the significance of the welfare state for the social capital–health relationship, policy-makers could learn a great deal about how investments in equality and social goods (e.g., welfare) could influence social capital and its potential health consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Informal social contacts were measured with the question: How often do you meet socially with friends, relatives, or work colleagues? 1 = “Never,” 2 = “Less than once a month,” 3 = “Once a month,” 4 = “Several times a month,” 5 = “Once a week,” 6 = “Several times a week,” 7 = “Every day.” Individual responses were aggregated to the country level. Country-level social contacts represent the mean value of individual responses.

  2. 2.

    Countries included in the correlations between spending on social protection and social capital in Figs. 11.2, 11.4, 11.6, and 11.8 are Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Estonia, Czech Republic, Latvia, Slovakia, Romania, Poland, and Slovenia. Some countries (Turkey and Croatia) were omitted due to a lack of indicators on spending on social protection.

  3. 3.

    See http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/social_protection/data/database# for more information about measures of social protection benefits.

  4. 4.

    Participation in associations was measured with the following two questions: There are different ways of trying to improve things in a country or helping prevent things from going wrong. During the past 12 months, have you done any of the following: worked in a political party or action group? 1 = “Yes,” 2 = “No”; worked in another organization or association? 1 = “Yes,” 0 = “No”. Those who had either worked in a political party or action group or in another organization or association were coded as having good formal social contacts. Country-level participation in associations represents the mean value of individual responses to this question.

  5. 5.

    Social trust was measured with the question: Would you say that most people can be trusted, or that you can’t be too careful in dealing with people? The responses varied from 0 (“You can’t be too careful”) to 10 (“Most people can be trusted”). Individual responses were aggregated to the country level. Country-level social trust represents the mean value of individual responses.

  6. 6.

    Social resources were measured with the question: If for some reason you were in serious financial difficulty and had to borrow money to make ends meet, how difficult or easy would that be? The alternatives were “very difficult” (1), “quite difficult” (2), “neither easy nor difficult” (3), “quite easy” (4), “very easy” (5). Individual responses were aggregated to the country level. Country-level social resources represent the mean value of individual responses.

References

  • Aidukaite, J. (2004). The emergence of the post-socialist welfare state. Doctoral dissertation, Södertörn University College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aidukaite, J. (2009). Old welfare state theories and new welfare regimes in Eastern Europe: Challenges and implications. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 42, 2–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allik, J., & Realo, A. (2004). Individualism-collectivism and social capital. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 29–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bambra, C. (2007). Going beyond the three worlds of welfare capitalism: Regime theory and public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61, 1098–1102.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bambra, C., & Eikemo, T. A. (2009). Welfare state regimes, unemployment, and health: A comparative study of the relationship between unemployment and self-reported health in 23 European countries. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63, 92–98.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berg-Schlosser, D., & DeMeur, G. (1994). Conditions of democracy in interwar Europe: A Boolean test of the major hypotheses. Comparative Politics, 26, 253–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonoli, G. (1997). Classifying welfare states: A two-dimension approach. Journal of Social Policy, 26, 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, B. (1993). Developments in East European social policy. In B. Deacon (Ed.), New perspective on the welfare state in Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labour in society. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eikemo, T. A., Bambra, C., Joyce, K., & Dahl, E. (2008). Welfare state regimes and income-related health inequalities: A comparison of 23 European countries. European Journal of Public Health, 18, 593–599.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eikemo, T., Huisman, M., Bambra, C., & Kunst, A. (2008). Health inequalities according to educational level in different welfare regimes: A comparison of 23 European countries. Sociology of Health and Illness, 30, 565–582.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrera, M. (1996). The ‘southern’ model of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6, 17–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franzini, L., Caughy, M., Spears, W., & Fernandez Esquer, M. E. (2005). Neighbourhood economic conditions, social processes, and self-rated health in low-income neighbourhoods in Texas: A multilevel latent variables model. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 1135–1150.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fritzell, J. (2001). Still different? Income distribution in the Nordic countries in a European Comparison. In M. Kautto, J. Fritzell, B. Hvinden, J. Kvist, & H. Uusitalo (Eds.), Nordic welfare states in the European context. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritzell, J., & Lennartsson, C. (2005). Financial transfers between generations in Sweden. Aging and Society, 25, 397–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2000). Social capital and civil society (IMF Working Paper No. 00/74). Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herreros, F. (2004). The problem of forming social capital: Why trust? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Herreros, F., & Criado, H. (2008). The state and the development of social trust. International Political Science Review, 29, 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, E, & Stephens, J. D. (1996). International and the Social democratic welfare state. Paper presented at the conference on challenges and labor: Integration, Employment and Bargaining in Scandinavia and United States, Berkeley, CA, Hummer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Islam, K., Merlo, J., Kawachi, I., Lindström, M., & Gerdtham, U.-G. (2006). Social capital and health: Does egalitarianism matter? A literature review. International Journal for Equity in Health, 5, 3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kääriäinen, J., & Lehtonen, H. (2006). The variety of social capital in welfare state regimes—A comparative study of 21 countries. European Societies, 8, 27–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, O. (1999). Social policy in settled and transitional countries: A comparison of institutions and their consequences. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (8 July). Accessed March 3, 2008, from http://pre20031103.stm.fi/english/tao/publicat/tandem/kangas/olli.htm

  • Klausen, K. K., & Selle, P. (1995). Frivillig organisering i norden. Köpenhamn: Jurist och ekonomförbundets Förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohli, M. (1999). Private and public transfers between generations: Linking the family and the state. European Societies, 1, 81–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korpi, W. (1983). The democratic class struggle. London: Routledge & Kegan Poul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumlin, S., & Rothstein, B. (2005). Making and breaking social capital. Comparative political studies, 38, 339–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeGrand, J. (1997). Knights, knaves or pawns? Human behaviour and social policy. Journal of Social Policy, 26, 149–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi, M. (1996). A state of trust (Working Paper 1996/73). Florence: European Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of structure and action. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lundberg, O., Åberg Yngwe, M., Kölegård Stjärne, M., Björk, L., & Fritzell, J. (2008). The Nordic Experience: Welfare states and public health (NEWS). Health Equity Studies No 12. Centre for Health Equity Studies (CHESS), Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narayan, D. (1999). Bonds and bridges: Social capital and poverty. Washington, DC: Poverty Group, World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2001). The well-being on nations. The role of human and social capital. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichler, F., & Wallace, C. (2007). Patterns of formal and informal social capital in Europe. European Sociological Review, 23, 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making democracy work—Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1995). Russia as an hour-glass society: A constitution without citizens. East European Constitutional Review, 34, 34–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostila, M. (2007). Social capital and health in European welfare regimes: A multilevel approach. Journal of European Social Policy, 17, 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rostila, M. (2011a). A resource-based theory of social capital for health research—Can it help us to bridge the individual and the collective facet of the concept? Social Theory and Health, 9, 109–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rostila, M. (2011b). The facets of social capital. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(3), 308–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rostila, M. (2013). Social capital and health inequality in European Welfare states. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B. (2001). Social capital in the social democratic welfare state. Politics and Society, 29, 207–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B. (2003). Sociala fällor och tillitens problem. Stockholm: SNS förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B., & Uslaner, E. (2005). All for all: Equality, corruption, and social trust. World Politics, 58, 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheepers, P., Te Grotenhuis, M., & Gelissen, J. (2002). Welfare states and dimensions of social capital-cross national comparisons of social contacts in European countries. European Societies, 4, 185–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, T., & Amenta, E. (1986). States and social policies. Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 131–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The World Bank. (1998). The initiative on defining, monitoring and measuring social capital. Overview and program description (Social Capital Initiative Working Paper No. 1). Social Development Department, The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torpe, L. (2003). Social capital in Denmark: A Deviant case? Scandinavian Political Studies, 26, 27–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torsvik, G. (2000). Social capital and economic development: A plea for mechanisms. Rationality and Society, 12, 451–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullman-Margalit, E. (2004). Trust, distrust and in between. In R. Hardin (Ed.), Distrust. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uslaner, E. (2002). The moral foundations of trust. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oorschot, W., & Arts, W. (2005). The social capital of European welfare states: The crowding out hypothesis revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 15, 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Oorschot, W., Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2006). Social capital in Europe. Acta Sociologica, 49, 149–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Völker, B., & Flap, H. (2001). Weak ties as a liability. Rationality and Society, 13, 397–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, R. G. (1996). Unhealthy societies. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, A. (1989). Whose keeper? Social science and moral obligation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Health Equity Studies (CHESS), Stockholm University/Karolinska Institutet, Sveavägen 160, SE-106 91, Stockholm, Sweden

    Mikael Rostila Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Mikael Rostila Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mikael Rostila Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Social & Behavioral Sciences, Harvard University, Huntington Ave. 677, Boston, 02115, Massachusetts, USA

    Ichiro Kawachi

  2. , Department of Epidemiology, Okayama University Graduate School of Me, Shikata-cho 2-5-1, Okayama City, 700-8558, Japan

    Soshi Takao

  3. Dept Social & Behavioral Sciences, Harvard University, Huntington Ave. 677, Boston, 02115, Massachusetts, USA

    S.V. Subramanian

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rostila, M. (2013). The Social Capital of Welfare States and Its Significance for Population Health. In: Kawachi, I., Takao, S., Subramanian, S. (eds) Global Perspectives on Social Capital and Health. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7464-7_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7464-7_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7463-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7464-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation