IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rdg/emxxdp/em-dp2014-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Social Capital Stocks, Giving Flows and Welfare Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Lorna Zischka

    (Department of Economics, University of Reading)

Abstract

Giving is a quintessentially relational activity. Giving time and money to meet the needs of persons other than oneself fosters interpersonal trust, social cohesion and collaboration; relational factors that are foundational to productivity and life-satisfaction. Citizenship Survey data from the UK is used to provide empirical evidence for the link between this 'social capital' and giving, and giving and welfare outcomes. Welfare is measured in private terms (life-satisfaction and income) as well as in communal terms (trust, crime and deprivation). We find that giving levels interact with all expressions of welfare on a similar scale to big social issues like unemployment, race, education, ill-health and low incomes. People who give only when constrained to do so by social pressures have less association with positive welfare outcomes than those who give freely. We propose that giving flows link social capital stocks to welfare outcomes, and that positive welfare outcomes also incentivize time and money investments back into the relational (social) capital stock. Understanding social capital and its benefits through the prism of giving flows clarifies how one might invest in the relational stock. It also bypasses many measurement complexities by targeting the flow to and from the stock rather than the stock itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Lorna Zischka, 2014. "Social Capital Stocks, Giving Flows and Welfare Outcomes," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2014-04, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    • Handle: RePEc:rdg:emxxdp:em-dp2014-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/economics/emdp2014109.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sacco, Pier Luigi & Vanin, Paolo & Zamagni, Stefano, 2006. "The Economics of Human Relationships," Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism, in: S. Kolm & Jean Mercier Ythier (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 695-730, Elsevier.
    2. Emma Grant, 2001. "Social Capital and Community Strategies: Neighbourhood Development in Guatemala City," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(5), pages 975-997, November.
    3. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Gianluca Grimalda, 2012. "The value of real voluntary associations," Econometica Working Papers wp37, Econometica.
    4. Eiji Yamamura, 2015. "Norm for redistribution, social capital, and perceived tax burden: comparison between highand low-income households," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 6(2).
    5. Eiji Yamamura, 2014. "Trust in government and its effect on preferences for income redistribution and perceived tax burden," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 71-100, February.
    6. Lorna Zischka, 2013. "Valuing Social Capital By The Resources People Allocate To One Another," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(5), pages 609-625, July.
    7. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix, 1997. "The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 746-755, September.
    8. Anju Vajja & Howard White, 2008. "Can the World Bank Build Social Capital? The Experience of Social Funds in Malawi and Zambia," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(8), pages 1145-1168.
    9. Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Paul Frijters, 2004. "How Important is Methodology for the estimates of the determinants of Happiness?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(497), pages 641-659, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matías Membiela-Pollán & María Alló-Pazos & Carlos Pateiro-Rodríguez & Félix Blázquez-Lozano, 2019. "The Inefficiency of the Neoclassical Paradigm in the Promotion of Subjective Well-Being and Socioeconomic, and Environmental Sustainability: An Empirical Test for the Spanish Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Lorna Zischka & Marina Della Giusta, 2016. "Helping without Trusting: Disentangling Prosocial Behaviours," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2016-11, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    3. Lorna Zischka, 2016. "The Interaction between Prosocial (Giving) Behaviours and Social Cohesion," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2016-07, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    4. Bell, David N.F. & Hart, Robert A., 2010. "Retire Later or Work Harder?," IZA Discussion Papers 4720, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Panos, Georgios A. & Theodossiou, Ioannis, 2010. "Unionism and Peer-Referencing," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-122, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    6. Catherine Sofer & Natalia Radtchenko & Ekaterina Kalugina, 2008. "Une analyse du partage intra familial du revenu à partir de données subjectives," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 186(5), pages 101-116.
    7. Cho, Seo-young & Vadlamannati, Krishna Chaitanya, 2010. "Compliance for big brothers: An empirical analysis on the impact of the anti-trafficking protocol," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 118, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    8. Fluhrer, Svenja & Kraehnert, Kati, 2022. "Sitting in the same boat: Subjective well-being and social comparison after an extreme weather event," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Senik, Claudia, 2009. "Direct evidence on income comparisons and their welfare effects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 408-424, October.
    10. Inmaculada Garc�a-Mainar & V�ctor M. Montuenga-G�mez, 2017. "Subjective educational mismatch and signalling in Spain," Documentos de Trabajo dt2017-03, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    11. Alfred Michael Dockery & Sherry Bawa, 2014. "Is working from home good or bad work? Evidence from Australian employees," Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre Working Paper series WP1402, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School.
    12. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo, 2012. "Life Satisfaction, Household Income and Personality Traits," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 86, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    13. Anja Schöttner & Veikko Thiele, 2010. "Promotion Tournaments and Individual Performance Pay," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 699-731, September.
    14. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    15. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    16. Milo Bianchi, 2012. "Financial Development, Entrepreneurship, and Job Satisfaction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 273-286, February.
    17. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    18. Bjornskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina AV & Schnellenbach, Jan, 2009. "On the relation between income inequality and happiness: Do fairness perceptions matter?," MPRA Paper 19494, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Bhuiyan, Muhammad Faress & Ivlevs, Artjoms, 2019. "Micro-entrepreneurship and subjective well-being: Evidence from rural Bangladesh," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 625-645.
    20. McDonald, Rebecca & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2018. "The Shadow Prices of Voluntary Caregiving: Using Panel Data of Well-Being to Estimate the Cost of Informal Care," IZA Discussion Papers 11545, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rdg:emxxdp:em-dp2014-04. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Alexander Mihailov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/derdguk.html .

    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.