Civic participation in rural Europe

• Authors: Paweł Starosta
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The main goal of this article is to make an attempt at answering three main problem questions: 1) What is the general level of civic participation of Europe’s rural population in the end of the first decade of the 21st century and what is the scale of differentiation of the participation in different European countries? 2) What patterns of civic participation dominate in Europe’s rural population? And 3) Which of the belw listed models explaining the differentiation of civic participation (Socio Economic Status Model; Social Capital Model or Attachment Model) is best fitted to explain the changeability of European rural population’s participation? In the article, civic participation is understood in terms of behavioural approach as activity executed by the actions of citizens in the public, political and associative spheres. The data for empirical analysis comes from the fourth round of the European Social Survey conducted in 21 European countries in 2008. This article employs only the data referring to the sample of 14 509 respondents who declared themselves as living in rural areas. The sample under research is not to be identified with farmers. The results of the study highlight four general conclusions. First, the level of civic participation of the rural inhabitants of Europe is lower than we assumed hypothetically. The mean value on the scale of 0 to 913 points is merely 1.17 points. Almost 17% of the rural inhabitants of Europe did not participate in any of the act of participation covered by the study, whereas 38% participated only in one of them. Second, our analyses revealed a high level of differentiation of civic participation in countries studied. In general, the former Eastern-bloc countries, Portugal, and Spain form a cluster of countries with the lowest level of civic participation. Therefore, these are the countries where authoritarian rules, irrelevant of their orientation, lasted longest in the 20th century Europe. Italy, Cyprus and Switzerland are the intermediary cluster between the former group and the old democracies: Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France and UK. The highest level of civic participation was identified in the Scandinavian countries. Third, as a result of the empirical analyses conducted, four major patterns of civic participation have been distinguished: campaign participation, party participation, voluntaristic participation, and voting participation. Among them voting and campaign participation forms would be the most common modes of civic involvement in the rural part of Europe. Finally, our analyses revealed that among the three verified models explaining diversification of civic participation, it was the model of social capital that had the greatest prediction power, and not the model of socio-economic status, as was expected.

Keywords

EN

Civic Participation; Rural Society; Europe; European Social Survey 2008

• Publisher: Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe, Stowarzyszenie
• Journal: Przegląd Socjologiczny
• Year: 2010
• Volume: 59
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 77-108

Dates

published

2010

Contributors

author

Paweł Starosta

• University of Lodz, Lodz

References

• Alberg M., Sandberg M., 2003, Social Capital and Democratisation. Roots of trust in post-Communist Poland and Ukraine, Aldershot; Ashgate.
• Bartkowski J., 2003, Social Capital in Poland [in:] Badescu G., Uslaner E. M. (eds.) Social Capital and the Transition to Democracy, London; Rontledge, pp. 184–199.
• Bauman Z., 2001, Community, Cambridge: polity.
• Bourdieu P., 1986, Forms of Capital [in:] Richardson J.G. (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Wesport; Greenwood Press, pp. 241–258.
• Bowlby J., 1997, Attachment, London; PIMLICO.
• Coleman J.S., 1994, Foundations of Social Theory, Cambridge: The Belknap Press.
• Davies K., Moore W., 1975, O niektórych zasadach uwarstwienia, [in:] Derczyński W, Jasińska-Kania A., Szacki J., (eds.), Elementy Teorii Socjologicznych, Warszawa: PWN, pp. 464–476.
• Delanty G., 2000, Citizenship in a Global Age, Buckingham; Open University Press.
• Downs A., 1957, An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York; HarperCollins.
• Edwards M., 2009, Civil Society, Cambridge; polity.
• Etzioni A., 2004, The Common Good, Cambridge; polity.
• Fung A., 2006, Empowered Participation. Reinventing Urban Democracy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Gliński P., Palska H., 1996, Cztery wymiary aktywności obywatelskiej [in:] Domański H., Rychard A. (eds.), Elementy Nowego Ładu, Warszawa; IFiS PAN.
• Grabb E. G, Curtis J. E., 1992, Voluntary association activity in English Canada, French Canada and United States: A multivariate analysis, The Canadian Journal of Sociology vol.17(4) pp. 371–388.
• Grandberg L., Nikula J. (eds.)., 1995, The Peasant State. The state and rural question in 20th century Finland; Rovaniemi; University of Lapland.
• Hall P. A., 2002, The Role of Government and the Distribution of Social Capital [in:] Putnam R. (ed.), Democracies in Flux, Oxford; Oxford University Press, pp. 21–57.
• Halpren D., 2005, Social Capital, Cambridge: polity.
• Hechter M., 1987, Principles of Group Solidarity, Berkeley; University of California Press.
• Hickey S, Mohan G., 2004, Toward participation as transformation; critical themes and challenges [in:] Hickey S., Mohan G., (eds.) Participation. From Tyranny to Transformation? London; Zed Books, pp. 3–24.
• Huntington S. P., 2004, The Clash of Civilizations? [in:] Lechner F. J. Boli J. (eds.) The Globalization Reader, Oxford : Blackwell Publishing, pp. 36–43.
• Kerblay B., 1971, Chayanov and the Theory of Peasantry as a Specific Type of Economy [in:] Shanin T., (ed.) Peasants and Peasant Societies, Aylesbury: Penguin Education.
• Li Y, Savage M., Pickles A., 2002, Social stratification and associational involvement in England and Wales (1972–1999),manuscript. Paper presented at the conference of the International Sociological Association in Brisbane, Australia, July 2002.
• Lin N., 2001, Social Capital. A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
• Lipset S. M., 1998, Homo politicus. Społeczne podstawy polityki, Warszawa; Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
• McPherson J. M., 1988, A Theory of Voluntary Organizations [in:] Milofsky C. (ed.) Community Organizations. Studies in Resource Mobilization and Exchange, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Marquand D., 2004, Decline of Public, Cambridge: polity.
• Mondak J. J., Gearing A. F., 2003, Civic engagement in a post – communist state [in:] Badescu G., Uslaner E. M,(eds.) Social Capital and the Transition to Democracy, London; Routledge
• Misztal B., 1977, Uczestnictwo społeczne, Warszawa; PWN.
• Novak P. J., Rickson R. E., Ramsey C.E., Goudy W.J., 1982, Community Conflict and `Models of Political Participation, Rural Sociology, vol.47 (2), pp. 333–348.
• Olson M., 1974, The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Cambridge; Harvard University Press.
• Pattie Ch, Seyed P., Whiteley P., 2003, Citizenship and Civic Engagement; Attitudes and Behaviour in Britan, Political Studies, vol. 51, pp. 443–468.
• Putnam R. D., 2001, Bowling Alone, New York; Simon & Schuster.
• Rothstein B., 2002, Social Capital in Social Democratic State [in:] Putnam R (ed.), Democracies in Flux, Oxford; Oxford University Press, pp. 289–331.
• Rossteutscher S., 2008, Social capital and civic engagement. A comparative perspective [in:] Castiglione D, Van Deth J. W., Wolleb G., Social Capital, Oxford; Oxford University Press, pp. 208–240.
• Sartori G.,1994, Teoria demokracji, Warszawa; PWN.
• Steinberger P. J., 1981, Political Participation and Communality; A Cultural /Interpersonal Approach, Rural Sociology, vol. 48 (1), pp. 7–19.
• Starosta P., 1983, Uczestnictwo a zróżnicowanie społeczne ludności wiejskiej, Ph.D dissertation, Lódź; Instytut Socjologii Uniwersytet Łódzki.
• Starosta P., Stanek O., 2002, Zaangażowanie polityczne mieszkańców wiejskich i małomiasteczkowych społeczności lokalnych w Bułgarii, Kanadzie, Polsce i Rosji. Przegląd Socjologiczny, vol. LI/1 pp. 109–144.
• Starosta P., Frykowski M., 2008, Typy kapitału społecznego i wzory partycypacji obywatelskiej w wiejskich gminach centralnej Polski [in:] Szczepański M.S., Bierwiaczonek K., Nawrocki T., (red.) Kapitały ludzkie i społeczne a konkurencyjność regionów, Katowice; Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego pp. 231–263.
• Sztompka P., 2007, Zaufanie, Kraków; WYDAWNICTWO ZNAK.
• Tam H., 1998, Communitarianism. A New Agenda for Politics and Citizenship, Houndmills; MACMILLAN PRESS.
• Tillman K. J., 1996, Teorie Socjalizacji, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
• Verba S., Nie N., 1972, Participation in America. Political Democracy and Social Equality, New York; Harper & Row Publisher.
• Verba S., Schlozman K. P., Brady H.E.,1995, Voice and Equality. Civic Voluntarism in American Politics, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Identifiers

ISSN

0033-2356