IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v1y2013i1p59-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Class and Social Capital in China and Britain: A Comparative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Yaojun Li

    (Institute for Social Change, University of Manchester, Humanities Bridgeford Street, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK)

Abstract

We use the China General Social Survey (2005) and the Home Office Citizenship Survey (2005) to study civic engagement and neighbourhood trust in China and Britain in this paper. We focus on class differences in participation in sports/recreation, religion, children's/adult education and public-welfare activities, and trust in the neighbours. We find higher levels of civic involvement in Britain but greater neighbourhood trust in China. This is mainly due to structural differences. China has a large proportion of peasants who have very low levels of civic involvement but very high levels of neighbourhood trust. Among the non-peasant population, the two countries have similar levels of class differences in civic (except religious) involvement. There are small class differences in China on neighbourhood trust, but marked effects in Britain. Overall, there is a greater similarity than difference in class effects in both civic engagement and social trust in the two countries. While differences in demographic attributes (and China's specific institutional arrangement, the household registration system, or hukou) account for some of the observed patterns, we also find more pronounced class than demographic effects in the two countries. Class plays a major role in the development of social capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaojun Li, 2013. "Social Class and Social Capital in China and Britain: A Comparative Study," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 1(1), pages 59-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v1:y:2013:i:1:p:59-71
    DOI: 10.17645/si.v1i1.104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/104
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/si.v1i1.104?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v1:y:2013:i:1:p:59-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.