Questioning the new liberal dilemma: Immigrants, social networks, and institutional fairness

Comparative Politics

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 63-80

  Kumlin, Staffan ^a   Rothstein, Bo ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77958569272     PISSN: 00104159     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5129/001041510X12911363510394     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. World Bank, Civil Society Engagement: Review of Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006 (Washington: World Bank, 2006);
2. Anthony Bebbington, Michael Woolcock, Scott Guggenheim, and Elizabet Olson, eds., The Search for Empowerment: Social Capital as Idea and Practice at the World Bank (West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, 2006).
3. Hilde Coffé and Benny Greys, "Community Heterogeneity: A Burden for the Creation of Social Capital?" Social Science Quarterly, 87 (2006), 1068.
4. Christopher J. Anderson and Aida Paskeviciute, "How Ethnic and Linguistic Heterogeneity Influence the Prospects for Civil Society: A Comparative Study of Citizenship Behavior," Journal of Politics, 68 (2006), 786.
5. However, Newton's overview of the field suggests that while minority status usually has a negative effect on social capital and trust, there are notable exceptions. Among Newton's examples are the Japanese and Jewish minorities in the United States, and the Swedish-speaking minority in Finland. Kenneth Newton, "The New Liberal Dilemma: Social Trust in Mixed Societies," paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Join Session of Workshops, Helsinki, May 7-12, 2007.
6. Cf. Eric M. Uslaner, The Moral Foundation of Trust (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002).
7. Robert D. Putnam, "E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-First Century," Scandinavian Political Studies, 30 (2007), 137-74.
8. Ibid., 138.
9. Alberto Alesina and Eliana La Ferrara, "Participation in Heterogeneous Communities," Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115 (2000), 847-904;
10. Alberto Alesina and Eliana La Ferrara, The Determinants of Trust (Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research (2000);
11. Andrew Leigh, "Trust, Inequality and Ethnic Heterogeneity," The Economic Record, 82 (2006), 268-80.
12. Alberto Alesina and Eliana La Ferrara, "Who Trusts Others?," Journal of Public Economies, 85 (2002), 207-34.
13. David Sally, "Conversation and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: A Metaanalysis of Experiments from 1958 to 1992," Rationality and Society, 7 (1995), 58-92.
14. Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
15. Parhta Dasgupta, "Common Property Resources: Economic Analytics," Economics and Political Weekly, 40 (2005).
16. Ostrom, Governing the Commons, 36.
17. James Habyarimana, Macartan Humphreys, Daniel N. Posner, and Jeremy M. Weinstein, Why Does Ethnic Diversity Undermine Public Goods Provision? (Washington, DC: Center for Global Development, 2006).
18. Abhijit Banerjee, Rohini Somanathan, and Lakshmi Iyer, "History, Social Divisions and Public Goods in Rural India," Journal of the European Economic Association, 3 (2005), 639-47.
19. However, according to some recent analyses, there is very little to speak for the argument that multiculturalism would erode public support for social policies. Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka, "Multiculturalism and Welfare," Dissent, 50 (2003), 59-66;
20. Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka, Do Multiculturalism Policies Erode the Welfare State (Kingston, Ontario: School of Policy Studies, Queens University, 2004).
21. Cf. Christian Bjomskov, "Determinants of Generalized Trust: A Cross-Country Comparison," Public Choice, 130 (2007), 1-21.
22. Kenneth Newton, "New Liberal Dilemma," Helsinki, May 7-12, 2007;
23. Uslaner, Moral Foundation.
24. Banting and Kymlicka, "Multiculturalism and Welfare."
25. Peter Hallberg and Joshua Lund, "The Business of Apocalypse: Robert Putnam and Diversity," Race and Class, 46 (2005), 53-67.
26. See, for example, John Lloyd in Financial Times, July 12, 2004,
27. "Research Shows Disturbing Picture of Modern Life"; and Financial Times, "Leader," Oct. 12, 2006. The questions seem to be one reason for the rise of anti-immigration political parties in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
28. But see Jong-Sung You, "A Comparative Study of Income Inequality, Corruption and Social Trust: How Inequality and Corruption Reinforce Each Other and Erode Social Trust," (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government, 2006).
29. Mikael Hjerm, "Anti-immigrant Attitudes and Cross-Municipal Variation in the Proportion of Immigrants," Acta Sociologica, 52:1 (2009), 47-62.
30. For example, Melissa J. Marschall and Dietlind Stolle, "Race and the City: Neighborhood Context and the Development of Generalized Trust," Political Behavior, 26 (June 2004), 125-53;
31. Dietlind Stolle, Stuart Soroka, and Richard Johnston, "When Does Diversity Erode Trust? Neighborhood Diversity, Interpersonal Trust, and the Mediating Effect of Social Interactions," Political Studies, 56 (2008), 57-75.
32. Peter Nannestad and Gert T. Svendsen, Institutions, Culture and Trust (Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, the University of Gothenburg, 2005);
33. Staffan Kumlin and Bo Rothstein, "Making and Breaking Social Capital: The Impact of Welfare State Institutions," Comparative Political Studies, 38 (May 2005), 339-65;
34. Bo Rothstein and Dietlind Stolle, "Social Capital in Scandinavia," Scandinavian Political Studies, 22 (2003), 1-26.
35. Putnam, "E Plaribus Unum."
36. Juha Kääriäinen and Heiki Lehtonen, "The Variety of Social Capital in Welfare State Regimes: A Comparative Study of 21 Countries," European Societies, 8 (2006), 27-57;
37. Gunnar L. H. Svendsen, "Studying Social Capital in Situ: A Qualitative Approach," Theory and Society, 35 (2006), 39-70.
38. Pamela Paxton, "Association Memberships and Generalized Trust: A Multilevel Model Across 31 Countries." Social Forces, 86 (2007), 47-76
39. ; see also Meindert Fennema and Jean Tillie, "Social Capital in Multicultural Society," in Dario Castiglione, Jan van Deth, and Guglielmo Wolleb, eds., Handbook of Social Capital (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 349-71.
40. See Anniken Hagelund and Jill Loga, Frivillighet, innvandring, integrasjon. En kunnskapsoversikt (Oslo/Bergen: Senter for forskning på sivilsamfunn og frivillig sektor, 2009).
41. Marschall and Stolle, "Race and City."
42. Stolle, Soroka, and Johnston, "When Does Diversity Erode Trust."
43. Peter Thisted Dinesen, "Social tillid, civilsamfund of institutioner - En empirisk analyse af årsager till social tillid i Europa," Department of Political Science (Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University, 2006);
44. Markus Freitag and M. Buhlmann, "Political Institutions and the Formation of Social Trust: An International Comparison," Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 46 (2005).
45. Nannestad and Svendsen, Institutions.
46. Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002).
47. Ronald Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously (London: Duckworth, 1977).
48. Bo Rothstein and Daniel Eek, "Political Corruption and Social Trust: An Experimental Approach," Rationality and Society, 21 (2009), 81-112.
49. John T. Scholz, "Trust, Taxes and Compliance," in Valerie Braithwaite and Margaret Levi, eds., Trust and Governance (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1998), 135-66.
50. Natalia Letki, What Makes Citizens Trustworthy? Individual Community and Structural Determinants of Honesty and Law-Abindingness (Oxford: Nuffield College, 2003);
51. Natalia Letki, "Investigating the Roots of the Civic Morality: Trust, Social Capital, and Institutional Performance," Political Behavior, 28 (December 2006), 305-25;
52. Ji-Young Kim, '"Bowling Together' isn't a Cure-Ail: The Relationship between Social Capital and Political Trust in South Korea," International Political Science Review, 26 (2005), 193-213;
53. Dinesen, "Social tillid"; Freitag and Buhlmann, "Political Institutions";
54. Bo Rothstein and Dietlind Stolle, "The State and Social Capital: An Institutional Theory of Generalized Trust," Comparative Politics, 40 (July 2008), 441-61;
55. see also Sven Oskarsson, Torsten Svensson, and Per-Ola Öberg, "Power, Trust, and Institutional Constraints: Individual-Level Evidence," Rationality and Society, 21:2 (2009), 171-95.
56. Rothstein and Stolle, "Social Capital in Scandinavia";
57. Bo Rothstein and Eric M. Uslaner, "All for All: Equality, Corruption and Social Trust," World Politics, 58 (2005), 41-73.
58. Kumlin and Rothstein, "Social Capital."
59. Putnam, "E Plaribus Unum";
60. but see Christian Albrekt Larsen, "Trust, Inequality and Ethnic Heterogeneity," The Economic Record, 82 (2006), 268-80.
61. Terrcnce Casey and Kevin Christ, "Social Capital and Economic Performance in the American States," Social Science Quarterly, 86 (2005), 826-45;
62. Uslaner, Moral Foundation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002).
63. Eric M. Uslaner, "Does Diversity Drive Down Trust?" paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research - Join Session of Workshops, May 2-11, 2007.
64. Banerjee, Somanathan, and Iyer, "History, Social Divisions," 639.
65. You, "Comparative Study."
66. Bo Rothstein, "Förtroendet i det multikulturella samhället," in Sören Holmberg and Lennart Weibull, eds., Ju mer vi är tillsammans. SOM-rapport 34 (Gothenburg: The SOM-institute, University of Gothenburg, 2004), 81-91.
67. Alberto Alesina and Edward L. Glaeser, Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004);
68. Stefan Svallfors, The Moral Economy of Class: Class and Attitudes In Comparative Perspective (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006).
69. Statistics Sweden, Beskrivning av Sveriges Befolkningsstatistik 2005. Örebro: Statistiska Centralbyrån 2005.
70. Data from Swedish Commission for State Grants to Religious Communities, which is a civil service authority under the Ministry of Culture.
71. Hagelund and Loga, Frivillighet.
72. "Social rapport 2006," issued by the Swedish National Agency for Social Affairs, Stockholm. See also "Göteborgssammhällets utveckling 2007," report issued by Gothenburg City Hall (Göteborgs Stad, Stadskansliet).
73. The SOM studies are conducted by the SOM Institute at University of Gothenburg in the form of a mail questionnaire. For more information,
74. see Holmberg and Weibull, Ju mer vi. Since 1992, the SOM Institute has also conducted a number of local and regional surveys, including an annual survey in West Sweden. The sampling area covers the Västra Gotaland region, which contains 1.5 of the 8.9 million Swedish inhabitants. Gothenburg, the second largest city in Sweden, is located in the region. Our data comes from the 1999 version of this study. Questionnaires and return envelopes were sent to a random sample of 5,900 individuals between 15 and 80 years of age, residing in the Västra Götaland region, of which 3,760 returned the questionnaire by mail (totally blank questionnaires, or those that answered only background questions, were not denned as valid responses). Thus, the response rate (RR2 as defined by the American Association for Public Opinion Research) was 64 percent. The data were collected between October 1999 and January 2000. 52.
75. Staffan Kumlin, The Personal and the Political: How Personal Welfare State Experiences Affect Political Trust and Ideology (New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2004).
76. We treat non-contact and don't know as neutral middle categories as both these categories function roughly as middle categories with respect to the dependent variable. In other words, although non-contact must be regarded as categories apart on a conceptual level, little empirical information is lost by including both as one middle category.
77. Kumlin, The Personal and the Political.
78. A regression model analogous to Model 2, Table 2, reveals that non-Europeans are only insignificantly less trusting than non-Nordic Europeans -.34; p=.31) at the same time as both these groups are significantly less trusting than the Swedish majority (b= -1.04; and -.70 respectively; both significant at p=.001). Moreover, when it comes to interactive predictions, a series of regression models analogous to Models 3-5, Table 2, were run. These show that also the two disaggregated dummies interacted as they should with experienced justice, neighbor contacts, and organizational memberships. The one exception is that while experienced justice was significantly more consequential for trust among non-Europeans (b=.55; p=.023) compared to majority Swedes, a similar interaction could not quite be traced when a non-Nordic European dummy was used (b=. 11; p=.545). Finally, while informal neighbor contacts do cushion more than half of the negative impact of minority status as measured by non-European origin, this interaction did not reach statistical significance (p=.344). However, this is perhaps understandable in view of the small number of non-Europeans.
79. More precisely, the measure includes the following types of organizations: professional organization, parents' organization, local folklore society, humanitarian aid organization, tenants' association/housing cooperative/homeowners' association, sports/outdoor recreation association, immigrants' organization, consumers' cooperative, cultural society/music/dance, women's organization, local action group, environmental organization, automobile club, retirees' organization, political party (including women's or youth association), and "other" association.
80. This effect comparison makes sense knowing that while the formal organization variable can in principle range up to 16, only a handful of respondents are members of more than 10 organizations. Most score much lower on this variable: 87 percent hold 4 or fewer memberships (mean=2.5; SD= 1.9).
81. Jon A. Krosnick, "The Challenges of Political Psychology: Lessons to Be Learned from Research on Attitude Perception," in James H. Kuklinski, ed., Thinking about Political Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). As Krosnick (p. 120) explains, "Nearly every causal hypothesis of significance in political psychology is tested initially using cross-sectional data. Such data are easily available to investigators." Krosnick (p. 144) further notes, "There is no doubt that cross-sectional data can be informative regarding the validity of a causal hypothesis. If an expected correlation fails to appear, this certainly casts doubt on the causal process that implied it [...] once an initial convincing demonstration of correlational support is provided, it seems essential to move quickly on to employing either longitudinal data analysis methods [...] or experimental methods."
82. Nannestad and Svendsen, Institutions; Rothstein and Eetc, "Political Corruption."
83. In both Figures 1 and 2, all other variables are set to their means, except neighbor contacts (in Figure 1) and experienced fairness (in Figure 2) which are set to zero. Number of organizational memberships is set to zero in both Figures 1 and 2.
84. Russell Hardin, Trust: Key Concepts in the Social Sciences (Cambridge: Polity, 2002).