CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
AND SOCIAL COHESION

Measuring Dimensions of
Social Capital to Inform Policy

Panel on Measuring Social and Civic Engagement and
Social Cohesion in Surveys

Kenneth Prewitt, Christopher D. Mackie, and Hermann Habermann,
Editors

Committee on National Statistics

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
                    OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Panel on Measuring Social and Civic Engagement and Social Cohesion in Surveys Kenneth Prewitt, Christopher D. Mackie, and Hermann Habermann, Editors Committee on National Statistics Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS  500 Fifth Street, NW  Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Gov- erning Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engi- neering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by an unnumbered award from the Corporation for National and Community Service through the National Science Foundation. Sup- port for the Committee on National Statistics is provided by a consortium of federal agencies through a grant from the National Science Foundation (award number SES-1024012). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13:  978-0-309-30725-3 International Standard Book Number-10:  0-309-30725-2 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2014 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2014). Civic Engagement and Social Cohesion: Measuring Dimensions of Social Capital to Inform Policy. K. Prewitt, C.D. Mackie, and H. Habermann (Eds.), Panel on Measuring Social and Civic Engage- ment and Social Cohesion in Surveys. Committee on National Statistics. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal govern- ment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its mem- bers, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advis- ing the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in pro- viding services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
PANEL ON MEASURING SOCIAL AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND SOCIAL COHESION IN SURVEYS KENNETH PREWITT (Chair), School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University MICHAEL X. DELLI CARPINI, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania ROBERT W. EDWARDS, Independent Consultant, Camberra ACT, Australia MORRIS P. FIORINA, JR., Hoover Institution, Stanford University JEREMY FREESE, Department of Sociology, Northwestern University CHARLOTTE B. KAHN, The Boston Foundation, Boston, MA JAMES M. LEPKOWSKI, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan MARK HUGO LOPEZ, Pew Hispanic Center, Washington, DC NORMAN H. NIE, Independent Consultant, Los Altos Hills, CA PAMELA M. PAXTON, Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin STANLEY PRESSER, Sociology Department, University of Maryland JOEL SOBEL, Economics Department, University of California, San Diego SIDNEY VERBA, Department of Government, Harvard University CHRISTOPHER D. MACKIE, Study Director HERMANN HABERMANN, Senior Program Officer MICHAEL J. SIRI, Program Associate v

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL STATISTICS 2013-2014 LAWRENCE BROWN (Chair), Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania JOHN ABOWD, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University MARY ELLEN BOCK, Department of Statistics, Purdue University DAVID CARD, Department of Economics, University of California, Berkeley ALICIA CARRIQUIRY, Department of Statistics, Iowa State University MICHAEL CHERNEW, Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School CONSTANTINE GATSONIS, Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University JAMES S. HOUSE, Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan MICHAEL HOUT, Department of Sociology, New York University SALLIE KELLER, Virginia Bioinformatics Institute, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University LISA LYNCH, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University COLM O’MUIRCHEARTAIGH, Harris School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago RUTH PETERSON, Criminal Justice Research Center, Ohio State University EDWARD H. SHORTLIFFE, Departments of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University and Arizona State University HAL STERN, Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences, University of California, Irvine CONSTANCE F. CITRO, Director JACQUELINE R. SOVDE, Program Associate vi

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments This report is the product of contributions from many colleagues, whom we thank for their insights and effort. The project was sponsored by the Corporation for National and Community Service; additional input toward its initiation and development was contributed by the National Conference on Citizenship (NCoC) and the U.S. Office of Manage- ment and Budget. Early on during the panel’s work, Nathan Dietz and Christopher Spera (Corporation for National and Community Service), John Bridgeland and David Smith (NCoC), and Brian Harris-Kojetin (U.S. Office of Management and Budget) provided the panel with guidance regarding goals for the study. They also presented crucial background information about the status of the Serve America Act of 2009 (which calls for the Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics to “collect annually, to the extent practicable, data to inform the Civic Health Assessment”), about publications such as America’s Civic Health Index and related state and city projects led by NCoC and The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, and about the Current Population Survey (CPS) Civic Engagement Supplement. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that assist the institution in making its reports as sound as possible and to ensure that the reports meet institu- tional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study vii

OCR for page R1
viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. The panel thanks the following individuals for their review of this report: William P. Eveland, Jr., Department of Communication, Ohio State University; Nancy Folbre, Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; Lewis A. Friedland, Center for Communication and Democracy, University of Wisconsin–Madison; D. Sunshine Hillygus, Duke Initiative on Survey Methodology, Duke University; Michael Hout, Department of Sociology, New York University; Cheryl Maurana, Advancing a Healthier Wiscon- sin Program, Medical College of Wisconsin; Jack Needleman, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles; Robert J. Sampson, Department of Sociology, Harvard University; Nora Cate Schaeffer, Department of Sociology, Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin–Madison; Matthew Smith, Division of Integra- tions, Lingotek, and Brigham Young University-Idaho; Eric (Ric) Uslaner, Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland; and Burton A. Weisbrod, Department of Economics, Northwestern University. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions that resulted in a greatly improved report, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by Jennifer L. Hochschild, Department of Gov- ernment, Harvard University; and John C. Bailar III (professor emeritus), University of Chicago. Appointed by the NRC’s Report Review Com- mittee, they were responsible for making certain that the independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institu- tional procedures and that all review comments were carefully consid- ered. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests entirely with the authoring panel and the NRC. The panel would also like to thank the following individuals who attended meetings and generously presented material to inform panel deliberations: Robert Putnam, Harvard University, one of the leading and most influential research pioneers on the topics covered in this report, pro- vided an overview of the importance of, challenges facing, and opportuni- ties in the measurement of civic engagement and social cohesion; Peter Levine, Tufts University, informed the panel about the innovative work by the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engage- ment and Marco Mira d’Ercole, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, reported about ongoing data projects in Europe and discussed implications of the Stiglitz/Sen/Fitoussi Commission recom- mendations on measuring social connections and political engagement. Robert Groves, U.S. Census Bureau; Jim Lynch, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Thomas Nardone, Bureau of Labor Statistics; and Sunil Iyengar,

OCR for page R1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ix National Endowment for the Arts; presented to the panel from the perspec- tive of U.S. statistical agencies. Each provided insights about approaches to measuring national well-being and progress and their many compo- nents, and about how government data collection in the areas of civic engagement and social cohesion could potentially inform policy. Andrew Gelman, Columbia University, discussed small-area/ community-level estimation methods and potential nonsurvey (and nongovernment) data sources; Lisa Clement, Robert Kominski, and Christopher Laskey, U.S. Census Bureau, provided a range of insights about the performance of the CPS Civic Engagement Supplement and the potential role of American Community Survey and other government data collection vehicles. David Grusky, Stanford University, presented to the panel on the topics of intergenerational mobility, including data requirements for measuring it, as well as about the relationship of social and economic mobility to social capital and civic health. The panel could not have conducted its work efficiently without a capable staff. Constance Citro, director of the Committee on National Sta- tistics, and Robert Hauser, executive director of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, provided institutional leadership and substantive contributions during meetings. Kirsten Sampson Snyder, Divi- sion of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, expertly coordinated the review process. Eugenia Grohman provided thoughtful and thorough editing. Michael Siri provided logistical support throughout the many meeting of the panel and contributed substantively to the report compil- ing tables and documenting information sources. Christopher Mackie and Hermann Habermann served as staff leads on the project and contributed substantively and organizationally throughout the study. Most importantly, I would like to thank the panel members for their patience, creativity, hard work, and graciousness. Representing a number of disciplines—political science, sociology, and economics—they brought extensive collective expertise and contributed generously with their time and effort. It was a pleasure working with each of them. Kenneth Prewitt, Chair Panel on Measuring Social and Civic Engagement and Social Cohesion in Surveys

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 15 1.1. Why Measure Civic Engagement and Social Cohesion?, 15 1.2. Charge to the Panel, 22 1.3. Report Structure, 30 2 What Should Be Measured? 33 2.1. Definitions and Key Measurement Concepts, 34 2.2. Indicators for Measuring Social Capital, 45 3 Prioritizing Measures and Framing a Data Collection Strategy 57 3.1. Criteria for Assessing Data Collection Options, 57 3.2. Evidence of Causality and Associations—and Policy Implications, 60 3.3. Technical Survey Issues, 77 4 Competing and Complementing Data Strategies: The Role of the Federal Statistical System 81 4.1. The Comparative Advantage of the Statistical Agencies, 82 4.2. The CPS Supplements, 84 4.3. Design Options for the Civic Engagement and Volunteer Supplements, 87 4.4. Beyond the CPS, 95 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS 5 Alternative Measurement Approaches: Strategies for a Rapidly Changing Data World 107 5.1. Data Linking, 109 5.2. Survey and Nonsurvey Data Collection, 112 References 125 Appendixes A Alternative Taxonomies of Social Capital 137 B Schedule of CPS Supplements 143 C Standard Error Estimates for the September 2011 CPS Volunteer Supplement 147 D Social Capital, Civic Engagement, and Social Cohesion Content of U.S. Surveys 151 E November 2011 Civic Engagement Supplement to the Current Population Survey 169 F Biographical Sketches of Panel Members 177