Abstract
The main aim of this chapter is to compare the social capital structures produced by personal networks in Portugal, Switzerland, and Lithuania. On the one hand, we hypothesise that the type of social capital is primarily associated with the composition of personal configurations. On the other hand, we also expect that social capital structures are shaped by the constraints and opportunities associated with different welfare regimes, social policies, and level of social development in each country. Findings show that both Portuguese and Lithuanian networks are characterised by a bonding type of social capital, although in Portugal the interdependencies rely on the exchange of emotional support, whereas in Lithuania the interdependencies stem from face-to-face interactions. Switzerland, in contrast, is characterised by a bridging type of social capital.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
- 1.
Usually, focal individuals (Ego’s) are the most central nodes in the graph, as the family network method measures personal networks, also called Ego-networks.
- 2.
Empty networks were not included in the graph, as their measures are equal to 0.
- 3.
One exception is friendship networks in Lithuania , which show high density of support and a low centralisation. But the very small percentage of friendship networks in Lithuania, with only 4%, makes the case a rarity, and its sample basis rather small.
- 4.
This is obviously mostly true for men in Switzerland . For women, especially mothers, the dependence on one family member , namely their husband , remains very high in large segments of Swiss society (Levy and Widmer 2013).
References
Bjornberg, U., & Ekbrand, H. (2008). Configurations of family commitments: Patterns of support within Kin. In E. D. Widmer & R. Jallinoja (Eds.), Beyond the nuclear family: Families in a configurational perspective (pp. 13–37). Bern: Peter Lang.
Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. In J. C. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood.
Burt, R. (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burt, R. (2002). The social capital of structural holes. In M. F. Guilléen, R. Collins, P. England, & M. Meyer (Eds.), The new economic sociology: Developments in an emerging field (pp. 148–190). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital and the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–121.
Elias, N. (1994). The civilizing process. Oxford: Blackwell.
Elias, N. (1995). Technization and civilization. Theory, Culture & Society, 12(3), 7–42.
Elias, N., & Scotson, J. (1994). The established and the outsiders. New York: Sage.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1996). Welfare states in transition. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
Furstenberg, F. F., & Hughes, M. E. (1995). Social capital and successful development among at-risk youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 580–592.
Furstenberg, F. F., & Kaplan, S. B. (2004). Social capital and the family. In M. Richards, J. Scott, & J. Treas (Eds.), Blackwell companion to the sociology of families (pp. 218–232). London: Blackwell.
Ganjour, O., & Widmer, E. D. (2016). Patterns of family salience and welfare state regimes: Sociability practices and support norms in a comparative perspective. European Societies, 18(3), 201–220.
Girardin, M., & Widmer, E. D. (2015). Lay definitions of family and social capital in later life. Personal Relationships, 22(4), 712–737.
Kääriäinen, J., & Lehtonen, H. (2006). The variety of social capital in welfare state regimes: A comparative study of 21 countries. European Societies, 8(1), 27–57.
Kalmijn, M., & Saraceno, C. (2008). A Comparative perspective on intergenerational support: Responsiveness to parental needs in individualistic and familialistic countries. European Societies, 10(3), 479–508.
Oorschot, W., & Arts, W. (2005). The social capital of European welfare states: The crowding out hypothesis revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 15(1), 5–26.
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.
Wall, C., Aboim, S., Cunha, V., & Vasconcelos, P. (2001). Families and informal support networks in Portugal: The reproduction of inequality. Journal of European Social Policy, 11, 213–233.
Widmer, E. D. (2006). Who are my family members? Bridging and binding social capital in family configurations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(6), 979–998.
Widmer, E. D. (2016). Family configurations: A structural approach to family diversity. London: Routledge.
Widmer, E. D., & Ganjour, O. (2017). Family salience across nations: Configurations of morphological conditions. In V. Česnuitytė, D. Lück, & E. D. Widmer (Eds.), Family continuity and change: Contemporary European perspectives (pp. 33–59). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Widmer, E.D., Gouveia, R., Aeby, G., Česnuitytė, V. (2018). Understanding Personal Networks as Social Capital. In: Wall, K., Widmer, E., Gauthier, J., Česnuitytė, V., Gouveia, R. (eds) Families and Personal Networks . Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95263-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95263-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95262-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95263-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)