Associational membership and social capital in comparative perspective: A note on the problems of measurement

Politics and Society

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2002, Pages

  De Ulzurrun, Laura Morales Diez ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b Juan March Institute   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038174986     PISSN: 00323292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0032329202030003005     Document Type: Review

References (104)

1. Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (1963; reprint, Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989).
2. For a summary of this literature, see Jan W. van Deth, "Introduction: Social Involvement and Democratic Politics," in Private Groups and Public Life: Social Participation, Voluntary Associations and Political Involvement in Representative Democracies, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
3. Among others, see William Erbe, "Social Involvement and Political Activity: A Replication and Elaboration," American Sociological Review 24, no. 2 (1964): 198-215; Marvin E. Olsen, "Social Participation and Voting Turnout," American Sociological Review 37 (1972): 317-333; Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993); Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (New York: Harper & Row, 1995); Jan E. Leighley, "Group Membership and the Mobilisation of Political Participation," Journal of Politics 58, no. 2 (1996): 447-63.
4. Among others, see William Erbe, "Social Involvement and Political Activity: A Replication and Elaboration," American Sociological Review 24, no. 2 (1964): 198-215; Marvin E. Olsen, "Social Participation and Voting Turnout," American Sociological Review 37 (1972): 317-33; Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993); Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (New York: Harper & Row, 1995); Jan E. Leighley, "Group Membership and the Mobilisation of Political Participation," Journal of Politics 58, no. 2 (1996): 447-63.
5. Among others, see William Erbe, "Social Involvement and Political Activity: A Replication and Elaboration," American Sociological Review 24, no. 2 (1964): 198-215; Marvin E. Olsen, "Social Participation and Voting Turnout," American Sociological Review 37 (1972): 317-33; Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993); Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (New York: Harper & Row, 1995); Jan E. Leighley, "Group Membership and the Mobilisation of Political Participation," Journal of Politics 58, no. 2 (1996): 447-63.
6. Among others, see William Erbe, "Social Involvement and Political Activity: A Replication and Elaboration," American Sociological Review 24, no. 2 (1964): 198-215; Marvin E. Olsen, "Social Participation and Voting Turnout," American Sociological Review 37 (1972): 317-33; Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993); Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (New York: Harper & Row, 1995); Jan E. Leighley, "Group Membership and the Mobilisation of Political Participation," Journal of Politics 58, no. 2 (1996): 447-63.
7. Among others, see William Erbe, "Social Involvement and Political Activity: A Replication and Elaboration," American Sociological Review 24, no. 2 (1964): 198-215; Marvin E. Olsen, "Social Participation and Voting Turnout," American Sociological Review 37 (1972): 317-33; Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993); Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics (New York: Harper & Row, 1995); Jan E. Leighley, "Group Membership and the Mobilisation of Political Participation," Journal of Politics 58, no. 2 (1996): 447-63.
8. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
9. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
10. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
11. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
12. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
13. See, for example, Arthur P. Jacoby, "Some Correlates of Instrumental and Expressive Orientation to Associational Membership," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 163-75; Nicholas Babchuk and J. N. Edwards, "Voluntary Associations and the Integration Hypothesis," Sociological Inquiry 35 (spring 1965): 149-62; Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality (New York: Harper & Row, 1972); David L. Rogers, Ken H. Barb, and Gordon L. Bultena, "Voluntary Association Membership and Political Participation: An Exploration of the Mobilization Hypothesis," The Sociological Quarterly 16 (summer 1975): 305-18; Philip H. Pollock III, "Organizations as Agents of Mobilization: How Does Group Activity Affect Political Participation?" American Journal of Political Science 26, no. 3 (1982): 485-503; Karl-Dieter Opp, "Integration into Voluntary Associations and Incentives for Political Protest," in Organizing for Change: Social Movement Organizations in Europe and the United States, ed. Bert Klandermans (Greenwich, CT: JAI, 1989).
14. In some European countries, these networks have been so structurally defined as to segment society into "pillars." See, for example, J. P. Kruijt, "The Influence of Denominationalism on Social Life and Organizational Patterns," Archives de Sociologie des Religions 4, no. 8 ( 1959): 105-11 ; A. van den Brande, "Voluntary Associations in the Belgian Political System, 1954-1968," Res Publica 15, no. 2 (1973): 329-56; Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, 2d ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); Harry Post, Pillarization: An Analysis of Dutch and Belgian Society (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1989); Jaak B. Billiet, "Political Parties and Social Organizations in Flanders," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
15. In some European countries, these networks have been so structurally defined as to segment society into "pillars." See, for example, J. P. Kruijt, "The Influence of Denominationalism on Social Life and Organizational Patterns," Archives de Sociologie des Religions 4, no. 8 ( 1959): 105-11 ; A. van den Brande, "Voluntary Associations in the Belgian Political System, 1954-1968," Res Publica 15, no. 2 (1973): 329-56; Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, 2d ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); Harry Post, Pillarization: An Analysis of Dutch and Belgian Society (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1989); Jaak B. Billiet, "Political Parties and Social Organizations in Flanders," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
16. In some European countries, these networks have been so structurally defined as to segment society into "pillars." See, for example, J. P. Kruijt, "The Influence of Denominationalism on Social Life and Organizational Patterns," Archives de Sociologie des Religions 4, no. 8 ( 1959): 105-11 ; A. van den Brande, "Voluntary Associations in the Belgian Political System, 1954-1968," Res Publica 15, no. 2 (1973): 329-56; Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, 2d ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); Harry Post, Pillarization: An Analysis of Dutch and Belgian Society (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1989); Jaak B. Billiet, "Political Parties and Social Organizations in Flanders," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
17. In some European countries, these networks have been so structurally defined as to segment society into "pillars." See, for example, J. P. Kruijt, "The Influence of Denominationalism on Social Life and Organizational Patterns," Archives de Sociologie des Religions 4, no. 8 ( 1959): 105-11 ; A. van den Brande, "Voluntary Associations in the Belgian Political System, 1954-1968," Res Publica 15, no. 2 (1973): 329-56; Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, 2d ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); Harry Post, Pillarization: An Analysis of Dutch and Belgian Society (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1989); Jaak B. Billiet, "Political Parties and Social Organizations in Flanders," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
18. In some European countries, these networks have been so structurally defined as to segment society into "pillars." See, for example, J. P. Kruijt, "The Influence of Denominationalism on Social Life and Organizational Patterns," Archives de Sociologie des Religions 4, no. 8 ( 1959): 105-11 ; A. van den Brande, "Voluntary Associations in the Belgian Political System, 1954-1968," Res Publica 15, no. 2 (1973): 329-56; Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, 2d ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); Harry Post, Pillarization: An Analysis of Dutch and Belgian Society (Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1989); Jaak B. Billiet, "Political Parties and Social Organizations in Flanders," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997).
19. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
20. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
21. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
22. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
23. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
24. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
25. An abundant literature has shown this. See, for example, David A. Snow, L. A. Zurcher Jr., and Sh. E. Ekland-Olson, "Social Networks and Social Movements," American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 357-69; Bonnie H. Erickson and T. A. Nosanchuk, "How an Apolitical Association Politicizes," Revue Canadienne de Sociologie et Anthropologie/Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1990): 206-19; David Knoke, Organizing for Collective Action: The Political Economies of Associations (New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1990); Steven A. Peterson, "Church Participation and Political Participation: The Spillover Effect," American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992): 123-39; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Leighley, "Group Membership,"; Jan Teorell, "A Resource Model of Social Capital: Networks, Recruitment and Political Participation in Sweden" (paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research [ECPR] joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
26. But see J. J. Mondak and D. C. Mutz, "What's So Great about League Bowling?" (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 1997), for evidence that would support the opposite conclusion.
27. See Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, "Secondary Associations and Democratic Governance," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 393-472; Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen, Associations and Democracy (London: Verso, 1995); Jane J. Mansbridge, "A Deliberative Perspective on Neocorporatism," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 493-505. This literature does also stress the institutional and systemic effects of associations beyond those of citizen involvement in them: they provide information, may contribute to equalize representation, and offer an alternative form of social governance. However, we are not interested so much in the institutional role that associations play but in the consequences that associational involvement may have at the individual level. For an institutional approach, see also several of the chapters in Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds., Civic Engagement in American Democracy (New York/Washington, DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), and especially Theda Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/ Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
28. See Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, "Secondary Associations and Democratic Governance," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 393-472; Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen, Associations and Democracy (London: Verso, 1995); Jane J. Mansbridge, "A Deliberative Perspective on Neocorporatism," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 493-505. This literature does also stress the institutional and systemic effects of associations beyond those of citizen involvement in them: they provide information, may contribute to equalize representation, and offer an alternative form of social governance. However, we are not interested so much in the institutional role that associations play but in the consequences that associational involvement may have at the individual level. For an institutional approach, see also several of the chapters in Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds., Civic Engagement in American Democracy (New York/Washington, DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), and especially Theda Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/ Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
29. See Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, "Secondary Associations and Democratic Governance," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 393-472; Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen, Associations and Democracy (London: Verso, 1995); Jane J. Mansbridge, "A Deliberative Perspective on Neocorporatism," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 493-505. This literature does also stress the institutional and systemic effects of associations beyond those of citizen involvement in them: they provide information, may contribute to equalize representation, and offer an alternative form of social governance. However, we are not interested so much in the institutional role that associations play but in the consequences that associational involvement may have at the individual level. For an institutional approach, see also several of the chapters in Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds., Civic Engagement in American Democracy (New York/Washington, DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), and especially Theda Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/ Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
30. See Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, "Secondary Associations and Democratic Governance," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 393-472; Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen, Associations and Democracy (London: Verso, 1995); Jane J. Mansbridge, "A Deliberative Perspective on Neocorporatism," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 493-505. This literature does also stress the institutional and systemic effects of associations beyond those of citizen involvement in them: they provide information, may contribute to equalize representation, and offer an alternative form of social governance. However, we are not interested so much in the institutional role that associations play but in the consequences that associational involvement may have at the individual level. For an institutional approach, see also several of the chapters in Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds., Civic Engagement in American Democracy (New York/Washington, DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), and especially Theda Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/ Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
31. See Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers, "Secondary Associations and Democratic Governance," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 393-472; Joel Rogers and Joshua Cohen, Associations and Democracy (London: Verso, 1995); Jane J. Mansbridge, "A Deliberative Perspective on Neocorporatism," Politics & Society 20, no. 4 (1992): 493-505. This literature does also stress the institutional and systemic effects of associations beyond those of citizen involvement in them: they provide information, may contribute to equalize representation, and offer an alternative form of social governance. However, we are not interested so much in the institutional role that associations play but in the consequences that associational involvement may have at the individual level. For an institutional approach, see also several of the chapters in Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina, eds., Civic Engagement in American Democracy (New York/Washington, DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999), and especially Theda Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/ Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
32. See Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Kay Lehman Schlozman, Sidney Verba, and Henry E. Brady, "Civic Participation and the Equality Problem," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
33. See Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Kay Lehman Schlozman, Sidney Verba, and Henry E. Brady, "Civic Participation and the Equality Problem," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (New York/Washington DC: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999).
34. Especially, Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); idem, "The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life," The American Prospect 13 (1993): 35-42; idem, "Bowling Alone: America's Declinging Social Capital," Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (1995): 65-78; idem, "Tuning in, Tuning out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America," Political Science and Politics 28, no. 4 (1995): 664-83; idem, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
35. Especially, Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); idem, "The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life," The American Prospect 13 (1993): 35-42; idem, "Bowling Alone: America's Declinging Social Capital," Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (1995): 65-78; idem, "Tuning in, Tuning out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America," Political Science and Politics 28, no. 4 (1995): 664-83; idem, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
36. Especially, Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); idem, "The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life," The American Prospect 13 (1993): 35-42; idem, "Bowling Alone: America's Declinging Social Capital," Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (1995): 65-78; idem, "Tuning in, Tuning out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America," Political Science and Politics 28, no. 4 (1995): 664-83; idem, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
37. Especially, Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); idem, "The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life," The American Prospect 13 (1993): 35-42; idem, "Bowling Alone: America's Declinging Social Capital," Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (1995): 65-78; idem, "Tuning in, Tuning out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America," Political Science and Politics 28, no. 4 (1995): 664-83; idem, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
38. Especially, Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); idem, "The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life," The American Prospect 13 (1993): 35-42; idem, "Bowling Alone: America's Declinging Social Capital," Journal of Democracy 6, no. 1 (1995): 65-78; idem, "Tuning in, Tuning out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America," Political Science and Politics 28, no. 4 (1995): 664-83; idem, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
39. James S. Coleman, "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital," American Journal of Sociology 94 ( 1988): 95-120; idem, Foundations of Social Theory (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1990).
40. James S. Coleman, "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital," American Journal of Sociology 94 ( 1988): 95-120; idem, Foundations of Social Theory (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1990).
41. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
42. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
43. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
44. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
45. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
46. For a critique of this option, see Alejandro Portes, "Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology," Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998): 1-24, Alejandro Portes, "The Two Meanings of Social Capital," Sociological Forum 15, no. 1 (2000): 1-11; Michael W. Foley and Bob Edwards, "Escape from Politics? Social Theory and the Social Capital Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 550-61; Bob Edwards and Michael W. Foley, "Civil Society and Social Capital beyond Putnam," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 124-39; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 575-86; Kenneth Newton, "Social Capital and Democracy in Modern Europe," in Social Capital and European Democracy, ed. Jan W. Van Deth et al. (London: Routledge, 1999).
47. Dietlind Stolle, "Social Capital: A New Research Agenda? Toward an Attitudinal Approach" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000).
48. For sharp critiques of the approach to social capital that equate it to a feature of political culture, see Andrew Greeley, "Coleman Revisited: Religious Structures as a Source of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 587-94; Robert W. Jackman and Ross A. Miller, "Social Capital and Politics," Annual Review of Political Science 1 (1998): 47-73.
49. For sharp critiques of the approach to social capital that equate it to a feature of political culture, see Andrew Greeley, "Coleman Revisited: Religious Structures as a Source of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 40, no. 5 (1997): 587-94; Robert W. Jackman and Ross A. Miller, "Social Capital and Politics," Annual Review of Political Science 1 (1998): 47-73.
50. Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work; James D. Fearon, "Deliberation as Discussion," in Deliberative Democracy, ed. Jon Elster (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
51. Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work; James D. Fearon, "Deliberation as Discussion," in Deliberative Democracy, ed. Jon Elster (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
52. However, as Ronald La Due Lake and Roben Huckfeldt note, organizational engagement is not to be regarded as the sole - and maybe not even the main - source of network generation for the production of politically relevant social capital. Ronald La Due Lake and Robert Huckfeldt, "Social Capital, Social Networks and Political Participation," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 567-84.
53. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
54. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
55. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
56. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
57. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
58. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
59. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review
60. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
61. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
62. See this argument in many of Putnam's works and in John Brehm and Wendy Rahn, "Individual-Level Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital," American Journal of Political Science 41, no. 3 (1997): 999-1023; Dietlind Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone: The Development of Generalised Trust in Voluntary Associations," Political Psychology 19, no. 3 (1998): 497-525; Stolle, "Social Capital." Of course, an objection that has been made to these arguments is that many of these alleged relations remain empirically unproved. First, there is no strong evidence that supports the conclusion that it is associations that produce trust and reciprocity, and not the other way around, although Stolle has made some attempts in this direction; Stolle, "Bowling Together, Bowling Alone." Second, there is no empirical justification to the common assumption that all types of associations would be similarly effective in generating trust. For an empirical analysis of this relationship, see Carla M. Eastis, "Organizational Diversity and the Production of Social Capital: One of These Groups Is Not like the Other," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 66-77; Dietlind Stolle and Thomas R. Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital," American Behavioral Scientist 42, no. 1 (1998): 47-65; Amber L. Seligson, "Civic Association and Democratic Participation in Central America," Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (1999): 342-62; Mario Diani, "Capitale sociale, partecipazione associativa e fiducia istituzionale," Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 30, no. 3 (2000): 475-511 ; Dag Wollebœk and Per Selle, "Voluntary Associations and Social Capital: The Case of Norway" (paper presented at the ECPR joint sessions, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2000). Finally, the mechanisms through which associations would generate generalized trust remain unclear. See Margaret Levi, "Social and Unsocial Capital: A Review Essay of Robert Putnam's Making Democracy Work," Politics & Society 24, no. 1 (1996): 45-55. However, this is only of secondary importance in this article. Whether one considers the social-psychological approach to social capital adequate or otherwise does not prevent us from aspiring for good measurement instruments.
63. For a path-breaking and lively debate in this sense, see Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Survey Research and Membership in Voluntary Associations," American Journal of Political Science 32, no. 4 (1988): 908-28; Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Response to Smith's 'Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker' : Measurement Validity and the Continuity of Results in Survey Research," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 ( 1990): 662-70; Tom W. Smith, "Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 (1990): 646-61.
64. For a path-breaking and lively debate in this sense, see Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Survey Research and Membership in Voluntary Associations," American Journal of Political Science 32, no. 4 (1988): 908-28; Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Response to Smith's 'Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker' : Measurement Validity and the Continuity of Results in Survey Research," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 ( 1990): 662-70; Tom W. Smith, "Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 (1990): 646-61.
65. For a path-breaking and lively debate in this sense, see Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Survey Research and Membership in Voluntary Associations," American Journal of Political Science 32, no. 4 (1988): 908-28; Frank R. Baumgartner and Jack L. Walker, "Response to Smith's 'Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker' : Measurement Validity and the Continuity of Results in Survey Research," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 ( 1990): 662-70; Tom W. Smith, "Trends in Voluntary Group Membership: Comments on Baumgartner and Walker," American Journal of Political Science 34, no. 3 (1990): 646-61.
66. See also the extensive discussion of how to measure group involvement in Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality, 59-62, 91-93, and 542-43; and in Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, 58-62, and Appendix I.
67. See also the extensive discussion of how to measure group involvement in Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality, 59-62, 91-93, and 542-43; and in Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, 58-62, and Appendix I.
68. A different approach to measuring organizational involvement is to compile the associations' membership figures. See, for example, Peter A. Hall, "Social Capital in Britain," British Journal of Political Science 29, no. 4 (1999): 417-61 ; Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic"; Skocpol, "Advocates without Members: The Recent Transformation of American Civic Life," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (Washington, DC/New York: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999). However, this option has obvious limitations in terms of the generalizability of results, given that these data can be obtained only from associations that keep membership records, and there is a serious bias concerning the types of associations that do in fact keep such records. On the other hand, these figures do provide information only at an aggregate level and, specifically, about membership; thus, no individual-level information is available and no details about other aspects of organizational engagement (levels of activity, multiple memberships, etc.). For a full discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of both types of measurement strategies, see Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Appendix I.
69. A different approach to measuring organizational involvement is to compile the associations' membership figures. See, for example, Peter A. Hall, "Social Capital in Britain," British Journal of Political Science 29, no. 4 (1999): 417-61 ; Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic"; Skocpol, "Advocates without Members: The Recent Transformation of American Civic Life," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (Washington, DC/New York: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999). However, this option has obvious limitations in terms of the generalizability of results, given that these data can be obtained only from associations that keep membership records, and there is a serious bias concerning the types of associations that do in fact keep such records. On the other hand, these figures do provide information only at an aggregate level and, specifically, about membership; thus, no individual-level information is available and no details about other aspects of organizational engagement (levels of activity, multiple memberships, etc.). For a full discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of both types of measurement strategies, see Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Appendix I.
70. A different approach to measuring organizational involvement is to compile the associations' membership figures. See, for example, Peter A. Hall, "Social Capital in Britain," British Journal of Political Science 29, no. 4 (1999): 417-61 ; Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic"; Skocpol, "Advocates without Members: The Recent Transformation of American Civic Life," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (Washington, DC/New York: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999). However, this option has obvious limitations in terms of the generalizability of results, given that these data can be obtained only from associations that keep membership records, and there is a serious bias concerning the types of associations that do in fact keep such records. On the other hand, these figures do provide information only at an aggregate level and, specifically, about membership; thus, no individual-level information is available and no details about other aspects of organizational engagement (levels of activity, multiple memberships, etc.). For a full discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of both types of measurement strategies, see Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Appendix I.
71. A different approach to measuring organizational involvement is to compile the associations' membership figures. See, for example, Peter A. Hall, "Social Capital in Britain," British Journal of Political Science 29, no. 4 (1999): 417-61 ; Skocpol, "How Americans Became Civic"; Skocpol, "Advocates without Members: The Recent Transformation of American Civic Life," in Civic Engagement in American Democracy, ed. Theda Skocpol and Morris Fiorina (Washington, DC/New York: Brookings/Russell Sage Foundation, 1999). However, this option has obvious limitations in terms of the generalizability of results, given that these data can be obtained only from associations that keep membership records, and there is a serious bias concerning the types of associations that do in fact keep such records. On the other hand, these figures do provide information only at an aggregate level and, specifically, about membership; thus, no individual-level information is available and no details about other aspects of organizational engagement (levels of activity, multiple memberships, etc.). For a full discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of both types of measurement strategies, see Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Appendix I.
72. Verba and Nie, Participation in America.
73. All surveys used in this article were obtained from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive. The original collectors of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agencies bear no responsibility for my use of the data. The bibliographic citations for the data sets used follows. Ronald Inglehart et al., World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981-1984, 1990-1993, and 1995-1997 [Computer file], ICPSR version (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 2000; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Anna Melich, Eurobarometers, 1983-1998 [Computer files], ICPSR version, (Brussels, Belgium: INRA, Europe [producer], several years; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR; Koeln, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung [distributors], several years). Steven J. Rosenstone, Donald R. Kinder, Warren E. Miller, and the National Election Studies, American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-election Survey [Computer file], 4th version (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1999; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Sidney Verba et al. American Citizen Participation Study, 1990 [Computer file], ICPSR version, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center (NORC) [producer], 1995; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 1995).
74. All surveys used in this article were obtained from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive. The original collectors of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agencies bear no responsibility for my use of the data. The bibliographic citations for the data sets used follows. Ronald Inglehart et al., World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981-1984, 1990-1993, and 1995-1997 [Computer file], ICPSR version (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 2000; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Anna Melich, Eurobarometers, 1983-1998 [Computer files], ICPSR version, (Brussels, Belgium: INRA, Europe [producer], several years; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR; Koeln, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung [distributors], several years). Steven J. Rosenstone, Donald R. Kinder, Warren E. Miller, and the National Election Studies, American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-election Survey [Computer file], 4th version (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1999; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Sidney Verba et al. American Citizen Participation Study, 1990 [Computer file], ICPSR version, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center (NORC) [producer], 1995; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 1995).
75. All surveys used in this article were obtained from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive. The original collectors of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agencies bear no responsibility for my use of the data. The bibliographic citations for the data sets used follows. Ronald Inglehart et al., World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981-1984, 1990-1993, and 1995-1997 [Computer file], ICPSR version (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 2000; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Anna Melich, Eurobarometers, 1983-1998 [Computer files], ICPSR version, (Brussels, Belgium: INRA, Europe [producer], several years; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR; Koeln, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung [distributors], several years). Steven J. Rosenstone, Donald R. Kinder, Warren E. Miller, and the National Election Studies, American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-election Survey [Computer file], 4th version (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1999; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Sidney Verba et al. American Citizen Participation Study, 1990 [Computer file], ICPSR version, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center (NORC) [producer], 1995; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 1995).
76. All surveys used in this article were obtained from the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive. The original collectors of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agencies bear no responsibility for my use of the data. The bibliographic citations for the data sets used follows. Ronald Inglehart et al., World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981-1984, 1990-1993, and 1995-1997 [Computer file], ICPSR version (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 2000; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Anna Melich, Eurobarometers, 1983-1998 [Computer files], ICPSR version, (Brussels, Belgium: INRA, Europe [producer], several years; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR; Koeln, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung [distributors], several years). Steven J. Rosenstone, Donald R. Kinder, Warren E. Miller, and the National Election Studies, American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and Post-election Survey [Computer file], 4th version (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies [producer], 1999; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000). Sidney Verba et al. American Citizen Participation Study, 1990 [Computer file], ICPSR version, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center (NORC) [producer], 1995; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 1995).
77. Another review of the American surveys with membership questions from 1952 to 1988 can be found in Smith, "Trends in Voluntary Group Membership," appendix.
78. The one exception is the Common Core questionnaire developed by the Citizenship, Involvement and Democracy Project Common Core (CID) network on citizenship, involvement, and democracy supported by the European Science Foundation. See www.mzes.uni-mannheim.de/projekte/cid for further information.
79. Although Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, found additional survey data sets for his civic engagement measurements, neither the Roper Social and Political Trends archive nor the DDB Needham Life Style archive included proper items on associational membership.
80. Needless to say, these are perfectly legitimate goals. The problem arises when students of associational participation disregard these limitations and use these surveys as if they had been designed for measuring organizational involvement. We would surely not rely on general-purpose surveys to study electoral behavior; similarly, we should also be wary about studying associational involvement with these types of surveys.
81. A related but different problem is that of the varying list of countries included in different international surveys. See the appendix for an overview.
82. The American National Election Study (ANES) 1985 pilot study has been excluded from Table 2 because the group categories they provide in the list are extremely broad.
83. Indeed, Eurobarometer 50.1 has unexplainably collapsed into the same category political parties, trade unions, and professional associations.
84. See the discussion between Baumgartner and Walker, and Smith cited above.
85. In this sense, Putnam argues that "to the question 'How many groups do you find the average American belongs to?' it is only a slight exaggeration to respond 'As many as you'd like, if I ask hard enough.' " Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, 416.
86. Here on I will express this as 10+1.
87. See Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York: Wiley Interscience, 1970); Jan W. van Deth, "Equivalence in Comparative Political Research," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
88. See Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York: Wiley Interscience, 1970); Jan W. van Deth, "Equivalence in Comparative Political Research," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
89. Other alternatives are possible. The Common Core questionnaire of the CID network of the European Science Foundation provides an exhaustive common list while allowing national teams to add further categories relevant in their own countries.
90. The 1996 ANES did also ask for multiple memberships but for a maximum of four groups, for which it retrieved full information on other aspects (meetings, political discussions, etc.). On the other hand, the 2000 ANES did not put any limits to the number of groups respondents could report, but the list of groups was quite limited and had only a probing function. Equivalent results using the 1985 ANES pilot study were reported in Baumgartner and Walker, "Survey Research."
91. Unfortunately there is, to the best of my knowledge, no available international survey that would allow us to know how widespread this phenomenon is in Europe.
92. A preliminary analysis of cross-national differences in political membership can be found in Laura Morales, "Citizens in Polities: The Individual and Contextual Determinants of Political Membership in Western Countries," Estudios/Working Papers, 164 (Madrid, Spain: Institute Juan March de Estudios e Investigaciones, 2001).
93. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Bernhard Wessels, "Organizing Capacity of Societies and Modernity," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997); Stolle and Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike?"; Jan W. van Deth and Frauke Kreuter, "Membership of Voluntary Associations," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
94. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Bernhard Wessels, "Organizing Capacity of Societies and Modernity," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997); Stolle and Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike?"; Jan W. van Deth and Frauke Kreuter, "Membership of Voluntary Associations," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
95. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Bernhard Wessels, "Organizing Capacity of Societies and Modernity," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997); Stolle and Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike?"; Jan W. van Deth and Frauke Kreuter, "Membership of Voluntary Associations," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
96. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality; Bernhard Wessels, "Organizing Capacity of Societies and Modernity," in Private Groups and Public Life, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1997); Stolle and Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike?"; Jan W. van Deth and Frauke Kreuter, "Membership of Voluntary Associations," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (London: Routledge, 1998).
97. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality, 58-59.
98. Here two slightly different possibilities were available: to use the 50 percent threshold considering all respondents involved or to use this threshold only among those who gave valid answers to the question on public stands. If the former was chosen, the following groups were considered as political: veterans groups, senior people organizations, women's organizations, labor unions, professional organizations, political issue groups, and parties and candidates groups. If the latter was selected, to this list we would add nationality-ethnic groups, civic nonpartisan organizations, liberal-conservative groups, and neighborhood organizations. The results with both possibilities are shown.
99. Very frequently, scholars choose this alternative of definition without making explicit their theoretical criteria to classify groups as political or nonpolitical.
100. The "predefined" class includes the following categories: organizations active on a particular political issue, nonpartisan or civic organizations interested in the political life of a community or the nation, organizations that support general liberal or conservative causes, and organizations active in supporting candidates in elections. Since I am not a specialist in American associational life, I have inspired myself in the classification of political associations offered by Stolle and Rochon, "Are All Associations Alike?" who consider the following groups: political clubs; political parties; international affairs clubs; peace, environmental, and temperance organizations; and Third World and human rights groups.
101. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady, Voice and Equality.
102. Some preliminary attempts to account for these cross-national variations have already been made and can be seen in Wessels, "Organizing Capacity"; Morales, "Citizens in Polities."
103. Some preliminary attempts to account for these cross-national variations have already been made and can be seen in Wessels, "Organizing Capacity"; Morales, "Citizens in Polities."
104. A possibility that is worth exploring is whether these errors are due to problems of concept or language translation. However, this falls beyond my current research capabilities.