Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Social Cohesion Dividend
Roberto Foa [email protected]
Presentation to the OECD, Conference on Social
Cohesion and Development
Paris,
January 20th, 2011
ISS Dataset at the Hague
• Show that the social development is something that we can define, measure, and ultimately advance
• Help development practitioners identify countries with particular social development needs and concerns
• Explore the research link between social development and other development outcomes, such as growth, governance, and poverty reduction
“Social development is the extent to which countries have those social institutions that empower citizens to pursue a better quality
of life.”
Social Development
Social Development
“Social development is the extent to which countries have those social institutions that empower citizens to pursue a better quality
of life.”
Norms, rules, and customs that operate below the level of the state,
often informal and tacit
Examples include the norms of forming voluntary associations, engaging in protests, or non-
discrimination against women and minorities
Social Development
“Social development is the extent to which countries have those social institutions that empower citizens to pursue a better quality
of life.”
Social institutions that enable citizens to translate (economic and
human) assets into personal welfare
Social Development
“Social development is the extent to which countries have those social institutions that empower citizens to pursue a better quality
of life.”
Social institutions that enable citizens to translate (economic and human) assets into personal welfare
For example: non-discrimination in the labor market enables women and
minorities to translate their education and skills into economic returns
Indices of Social Development
Inclusion of Minorities
Non-exclusion of social minorities & indigenous peoples
Gender Equity
Non-discrimination against women
Inter-group Cohesion
Relations of trust and cohesion between defined ethnic,
religious, or linguistic identity groups
Interpersonal Safety and Trust
Norms of nonviolence between persons in society
Clubs and Associations
Relations of trust and cohesion within local communities
Civic Activism
The strength of civil society – levels of civic activism and
access to information
How do we measure social
cohesion?
Available Data
• International Country Risk Guide -- Ratings on Ethnic and Religious Tensions
• Minorities at Risk – Expert Assessment Ratings on Ethnic Discrimination and Conflict
• Gallup World Poll – Questions on Ethnic, Religious, and Inclusion of Migrants
• Cross-National Time-Series – data on incidents of social violence (e.g. riots, assassinations)
• World Values Survey – data on tolerance of minorities and social trust
• Fund for Peace – Rating on uneven development on group lines
• Economist Intelligence Unit – ratings on social disorder
• Latinobarometer – survey data on ethnic discrimination
• Afrobarometer – survey data on ethnic discrimination
• Asian Barometer – data on social trust
• The density of international organisations – (Amnesty, HRW)
• Civicus – Ratings on the civil society environment
Example Survey Items
• “Is this country a good place for ethnic minorities? Is this country a good place for religious minorities? (Gallup World Poll)
• “Here is a list. Which of the following kinds of people would you not want to have as neighbours? Mentioned – immigrants, people of a different race, members of a different ethnic group, members of a different religious group” (World Values Survey)
• “How much discrimination do indigenous peoples/racial minorities face in the: courts/police/government/school/workplace? (responses from indigenous/black/mulatto respondents only)” (Latinobarometer)
• “How much discrimination does your ethnic group face in daily life in this country?” (Afrobarometer)
Methodology
• The project combines over 200 indicators from 25 independent sources.
• We use the matching percentiles method used by Lambsdorff et al. (1999).
• Produces similar results to the unobserved components model used by the Worldwide Governance Indicators.
• In brief:
• i) we order all of our indicators from the most to least reliable and representative.
• ii) Scores from the second indicator are matched to the first indicator based on ranking of shared countries.
• iii) These are combined with the first indicator to produced refined scores.
• iv) We continue through all of the available indicators, reducing random error with each iteration to arrive at a final score.
Botswana
Nigeria
Tanzania
Burundi
Congo, DR
Other
countries
0.24
0.22
0.8
0.5
0.4
Botswana
Tanzania
Nigeria
Burundi
Congo, DR
0.24
0.22
0.8
0.5
0.4
% respondent participation in demonstrations, petitions,
boycotts (WVS)
Respondent has often attended meetings of a local development
association (Afrobarometer)
Matching Equally Ranked Values
Botswana
Nigeria
Tanzania
Burundi
Congo, DR
Other
countries
0.24
0.22
0.8
0.5
0.4
Botswana
Tanzania
Nigeria
Burundi
Congo. DR
0.24
0.22
0.8
0.5
0.4
Botswana
Tanzania
Nigeria
Burundi
Congo, DR
% respondent participation in demonstrations, petitions,
boycotts (WVS)
Respondent has often attended meetings of a local development
association (Afrobarometer)
0.23
0.16
0.15
0.5
0.4
Creating an Averaged Estimate
Data Used and Initial Results
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
Canada
New Zealand
ArgentinaSenegal
Uruguay
Israel
Congo, D.R.
Trinidad
Sweden
Top and Bottom 20 relative to GDP/cap
Canada
New Zealand
Sweden
Hong Kong, China
United States
Switzerland
Burkina Faso
Mali
Senegal
Benin
Ireland
Mozambique
Finland
Australia
Togo
Ghana
Madagascar
Tanzania
Uruguay
Vietnam
Macedonia, FYR
Algeria
Cote d'Ivoire
Belize
Brazil
Bahrain
Trinidad and Tobago
Russian Federation
Suriname
Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Pakistan
Lebanon
Cyprus
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Thailand
Kuwait
Sri Lanka
Israel
Sudan
top
bottom
Correlation with ethnic
fractionalisation
Af ghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Argentina
ArmeniaAustraliaAustria
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Boliv ia
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cape Verde
Central Af rican RepublicChad
ChileChina
Colombia
Comoros
Congo, Dem. Rep.Congo, Rep.
Costa Rica
Cote d'Iv oire
Croatia
Cuba
Cy prus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egy pt, Arab Rep.El Salv ador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
FinlandFrance
GabonGambia, The
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guy ana
Haiti
Honduras
Hong Kong, China
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
JordanKazakhstan
Keny a
Korea, Dem. Rep.Korea, Rep.
Kuwait
Latv ia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Liby a
Lithuania
LuxembourgMacedonia, FYR
Madagascar
Malawi
Malay sia
Mali
Malta
Mauritania
Mauritius
MexicoMoldov a
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
My anmar
NamibiaNepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slov ak RepublicSlov enia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Af rica
SpainSri Lanka
SudanSuriname
Sweden
SwitzerlandSy rian Arab Republic
Taiwan, China
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Venezuela, RB
Vietnam
Zambia
Zimbabwe
0.2
.4.6
.81
eth
nic
_fr
act
2 4 6 8 10Standardized values of (eeerfrac * std_cohe)
These data allow us to compare countries, and highlight social development challenges and achievements.
Sweden
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
Civic capacity
Gender equity
Inclusion of minorities
Crime and personal security
Intergroup cohesion
Strength of community
Colombia
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
Civic capacity
Gender equity
Inclusion of minorities
Crime and personal security
Intergroup cohesion
Strength of community
Iraq
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
Civic capacity
Gender equity
Inclusion of minorities
Crime and personal security
Intergroup cohesion
Strength of community
We can also begin to monitor social development progress over time.
Trends Over Time
Rising Gender Equity in the Middle East, 1990-2007
And we can highlight hidden strengths of regions around the world.
For example, levels of gender empowerment in Southern and Eastern Africa are higher than their GDP would lead us to expect.
Gender Empowerment in Africa
Albania
Algeria
Antigua and Barbuda
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas, The
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Benin
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Cambodia
Canada
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
China
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibout i
Dominica
Egypt, Arab Rep. Equatorial Guinea
Estonia
Fiji
Finland
France
French Polynesia
Gabon
Gambia, The
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Hong Kong, China
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
IrelandIsrael
Italy
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Korea, Rep.
Kuwait
Kyrgyz RepublicLao PDR
Latvia
Lebanon
Lithuania
Luxembourg
M acao, China
M acedonia, FYRM alaysia
M ali
M alta
M auritania
M aurit ius
M oldovaM ongolia
M orocco
Nepal
Netherlands
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Niger
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Papua New Guinea
PhilippinesPoland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Federat ion
Samoa
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovak RepublicSlovenia
Solomon Islands
Spain
Sri Lanka
St. Kit ts and NevisSt. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sudan
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab RepublicTajikistan
Thailand
Togo
Tonga
TunisiaTurkey
Turkmenistan
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan Vanuatu
Vietnam
Yemen, Rep.
Angola
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Comoros
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Congo, Rep.
EritreaEthiopia
Kenya
Lesotho
M adagascar
M alawi
M ozambique
Namibia
Rwanda
Senegal
Seychelles
South Africa
SwazilandTanzania Uganda
ZambiaZimbabwe
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11
Log GDP per capita
Gen
der
Eq
uit
y
As well as social development challenges.
Interpersonal Safety and Trust – Latin America and Caribbean
Albania
Algeria
Antigua and Barbuda
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Benin
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Bulgaria
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cape VerdeCentral African Republic
China
ComorosCongo, Dem. Rep.
Cote d'Ivo ire
CroatiaCzech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Gambia, The
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Hong Kong, China
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Korea, Rep.
Kuwait
Kyrgyz RepublicLao PDRLatvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Lithuania
Luxembourg
M acedonia, FYRM adagascar
M alawi
M alaysia
M ali
M altaM auritania
M auritius
M oldova
M ongolia
M orocco
M ozambique
Namibia
NepalNetherlandsNew Zealand
Niger
Nigeria
NorwayOman
Pakistan
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
PolandPortugal
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Samoa
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
SeychellesSierra Leone
Singapore
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the
Grenadines
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Tonga
Tunisia
TurkeyTurkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen, Rep.
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Argentina
Belize
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
HondurasJamaica
M exicoNicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Puerto Rico
Trinidad and Tobago
Uruguay
Venezuela, RB
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Log GDP per capita
Pers
on
al S
afe
ty a
nd
Secu
rity
Research Applications
Research Applications
Gender and Development
Gender Equity and Infant Mortality (1)
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Argentina
Armenia
AustraliaAustria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas, TheBahrain
Bangladesh
BarbadosBelarusBelgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei DarussalamBulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
ChinaColombia
Comoros
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Congo, Rep.
Costa Rica
Cote d'Ivoire
CroatiaCubaCyprus Czech RepublicDenmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican RepublicEcuador
Egypt, Arab Rep.El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
FinlandFrance
Gabon
Gambia, The
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
HungaryIceland
India
IndonesiaIran, Islamic Rep.
IrelandIsraelItaly
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Korea, Rep.Kuwait
Kyrgyz RepublicLao PDR
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
LithuaniaLuxembourg
Macedonia, FYR
MadagascarMalawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
MexicoMoldova
MongoliaMorocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nepal
NetherlandsNew Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
NorwayOman
Pakistan
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay PeruPhilippines
PolandPortugal
Qatar RomaniaRussian Federation
Rwanda
Samoa
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
SingaporeSlovak Republic
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
South Africa
SpainSri LankaSt. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
SwedenSwitzerland
Syrian Arab Republic
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tonga Trinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkey
TurkmenistanUganda
UkraineUnited Arab Emirates United KingdomUnited States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Venezuela, RBVietnamWest Bank and Gaza
Yemen, Rep.
Zambia
Zimbabwe
050
100
150
200
imort
0 .2 .4 .6 .8ngender
Residual Scatter Plot between gender equity and infant mortality, after controlling for: log GDP/capita, log GDP/capita2, female progression to secondary school (%), civic engagement,
governance (Voice and Accountability), HIV-AIDS infection rate
Chad
Togo
Cote d'Ivoire
Cameroon
Congo, Rep.Benin
Zambia
Niger
Bangladesh
Senegal
LesothoBurkina Faso
Mali
Morocco
India
Ethiopia
Burundi
Zimbabwe
Algeria
Malawi
MozambiqueEgypt, Arab Rep.
Ghana
Tanzania
Uganda
Suriname
Indonesia
Jordan
Guatemala
Korea, Rep.
Georgia
Tunisia
Lebanon
Namibia
South Africa
Botswana
Madagascar
Chile
Bolivia
Paraguay
Vietnam
Macedonia, FYREcuador
Mexico
Azerbaijan
Sri Lanka
China
Dominican RepublicArmenia
Mauritius
El Salvador
Cyprus
SwitzerlandAlbaniaColombia
Kyrgyz Republic
Ukraine
Israel
Venezuela, RBBelarusPanama
Malta
Peru
Slovak Republic
PhilippinesCroatia
ItalyRomania
Mongolia
Bulgaria
HungaryCzech RepublicCosta Rica
GermanyArgentina
Finland
LatviaEstonia
Denmark
MoldovaSlovenia
Australia
Lithuania
-60
-40
-20
020
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
.2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7ngender
p = 0.000***
Gender Equity and Infant Mortality (2)
Residual Scatter Plot between gender discrimination and infant mortality, after controlling for: log GDP/capita, log GDP/capita2, female progression to secondary school (%), civic
engagement, governance (Voice and Accountability), HIV-AIDS infection rate
Gender Equity and Infant Mortality (3)
Dominican RepublicMexico
Denmark
SloveniaEstonia
Lithuania
AustraliaFinlandHungaryPeruVenezuela, RBLatviaCroatiaCzech Republic
Belarus
ArgentinaColombiaGermanySlovak RepublicChileCyprus
Tanzania
El SalvadorSwitzerlandItaly
Malta
Romania
South Africa
BulgariaUkraine
Macedonia, FYR
Uganda
Moldova
ZimbabweKorea, Rep.
China
Albania
Philippines
Vietnam
IndiaKyrgyz Republic
Algeria
Indonesia
Armenia
Georgia
Bangladesh
Saudi ArabiaMorocco
Azerbaijan
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Jordan Egypt, Arab Rep.
-20
020
40
60
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1v44_sd_1
p = 0.007**
Proportion of managers saying „men have more right to a job than women (0-1)
Residual Scatter Plot between gender discrimination and infant mortality, after controlling for: log GDP/capita, log GDP/capita2, female progression to secondary school (%), civic
engagement, governance (Voice and Accountability), HIV-AIDS infection rate
South Africa
Namibia
Botswana
Malawi
Ghana
Tanzania
MozambiqueUganda
Lesotho
Zambia
Senegal
Mali
020
40
60
80
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
10 20 30 40 50 60beat_wifeyes
Gender Equity and Infant Mortality (4)
Proportion of husbands agreeing that „a married men has the right to beat his wife and
children‟ (0-100)
Show links between human development, civil society, and good governance.
Relationship between control of corruption (x axis) and interaction of democracy*civil society (y axis)
SwedenNorwayDenmark
NetherlandsFinlandSwitzerlandAustraliaUnited KingdomIcelandNew ZealandCanadaBelgiumUnited StatesGermany
LuxembourgFranceAustriaIreland
AndorraJapanItaly PortugalSpainEstonia MaltaCzech RepublicSlovak RepublicHungarySloveniaPoland CyprusGreeceCosta Rica Chile
Latvia UruguayLithuaniaMauritiusKorea, Rep.South Africa
BotswanaBulgaria IsraelCape VerdeGuyana CroatiaSurinameArgentinaPanama
NamibiaMexicoBrazilRomaniaGhanaMongoliaThailandIndiaDominican RepublicBeninMaliEl SalvadorSenegal LesothoSerbia and MontenegroNicaraguaMadagascarAlbaniaPhilippinesBoliviaHondurasMacedonia, FYRPeruNigerMozambiqueBosnia and HerzegovinaSri Lanka SingaporeTurkeyEcuadorParaguay Burkina FasoGeorgiaZambiaGuatemalaKenya TanzaniaGuinea-BissauMalawiIndonesiaGambia, The MalaysiaVenezuela, RB ColombiaRwandaMoldova MoroccoCongo, Rep. JordanArmeniaNigeriaAzerbaijan GabonChad UgandaBangladesh
AngolaCentral African RepublicKyrgyz RepublicEthiopiaBurundiUkraine LebanonAlgeriaRussian FederationCameroonLiberia TunisiaTogoPakistanVietnam Egypt, Arab Rep.Cote d'IvoireZimbabweEquatorial Guinea
TurkmenistanMyanmar LibyaIraq Belarus
China
Cuba
-1-.
50
.51
1.5
voic
e_nciv
ic
-2 -1 0 1 2 3corr2004
Is there an economic payoff to social cohesion?
• E.g. numerous papers have used social capital measures in growth regressions (e.g. Knack and Keefer 1997, Tabellini 2005), yet have sometimes been criticized on account of limited sample size and data reliability concerns.
• The new indices allow for replication with vastly expanded country samples.
Replication of Knack and Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation”
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Price level of investment goods, 1990 -.017
(.006)** -.008
(.003)* -0.010 (0.006)
-0.006 (0.003)
Real GDP per capita, 1990 -.0001 (.0001)
-.0001 (.00005)*
-0.000 (0.000)
-0.000** (0.000)
Primary School Enrollment, 1990 .004
(.020) -.0006 (.013)
0.004 (0.018)
-0.001 (0.012)
Secondary School Enrollment, 1990 -.007 (.020)
.003 (.014)
-0.007 (0.017)
-0.003 (0.013)
Former Eastern Bloc Country, 0-1 -3.039
(.994)** -3.504
(.740)*** -2.972** (0.896)
-3.477*** (0.665)
Inclusion of Minorities 3.505
(2.128) 3.068
(1.317)* 3.964* (1.847)
3.800** (1.236)
Gender Equity -2.499 (3.940)
-3.803 (3.426)
Intergroup Cohesion
1.678 (2.512)
2.400 (2.405)
Local Community 0.219
(3.457) 1.424
(3.433)
Social Cohesion Measure 9.917
(4.882)* 12.770
(3.597)*** 5.275
(5.924) 9.214* (3.963)
Civic Engagement .483
(3.972) -1.374 (3.526)
Sub-Saharan Africa -2.330 (1.114)
-1.793 (0.704)
Latin America and Caribbean -0.879 (1.005)
-1.211 (0.693)
Constant -5.668 (5.024)
-8.682 (3.401)*
-0.621 (5.780)
-3.487 (3.898)
N 70 98 70 98
adj. r2 0.35 0.32 0.40 0.37
Dependent Variable: Per Capita Economic Growth Rate, 1990-9
* significant at the 0.05 level; ** significant at the 0.01 level; *** significant at the 0.001 level
Replication of Knack and Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation”
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Price level of investment goods, 1990 -.017
(.006)** -.008
(.003)* -0.010 (0.006)
-0.006 (0.003)
Real GDP per capita, 1990 -.0001 (.0001)
-.0001 (.00005)*
-0.000 (0.000)
-0.000** (0.000)
Primary School Enrollment, 1990 .004
(.020) -.0006 (.013)
0.004 (0.018)
-0.001 (0.012)
Secondary School Enrollment, 1990 -.007 (.020)
.003 (.014)
-0.007 (0.017)
-0.003 (0.013)
Former Eastern Bloc Country, 0-1 -3.039
(.994)** -3.504
(.740)*** -2.972** (0.896)
-3.477*** (0.665)
Inclusion of Minorities 3.505
(2.128) 3.068
(1.317)* 3.964* (1.847)
3.800** (1.236)
Gender Equity -2.499 (3.940)
-3.803 (3.426)
Intergroup Cohesion
1.678 (2.512)
2.400 (2.405)
Local Community 0.219
(3.457) 1.424
(3.433)
Social Cohesion Measure 9.917
(4.882)* 12.770
(3.597)*** 5.275
(5.924) 9.214* (3.963)
Civic Engagement .483
(3.972) -1.374 (3.526)
Sub-Saharan Africa -2.330 (1.114)
-1.793 (0.704)
Latin America and Caribbean -0.879 (1.005)
-1.211 (0.693)
Constant -5.668 (5.024)
-8.682 (3.401)*
-0.621 (5.780)
-3.487 (3.898)
N 70 98 70 98
adj. r2 0.35 0.32 0.40 0.37
Dependent Variable: Per Capita Economic Growth Rate, 1990-9
* significant at the 0.05 level; ** significant at the 0.01 level; *** significant at the 0.001 level
Replication of Knack and Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation”
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Price level of investment goods, 1990 -.017
(.006)** -.008
(.003)* -0.010 (0.006)
-0.006 (0.003)
Real GDP per capita, 1990 -.0001 (.0001)
-.0001 (.00005)*
-0.000 (0.000)
-0.000** (0.000)
Primary School Enrollment, 1990 .004
(.020) -.0006 (.013)
0.004 (0.018)
-0.001 (0.012)
Secondary School Enrollment, 1990 -.007 (.020)
.003 (.014)
-0.007 (0.017)
-0.003 (0.013)
Former Eastern Bloc Country, 0-1 -3.039
(.994)** -3.504
(.740)*** -2.972** (0.896)
-3.477*** (0.665)
Inclusion of Minorities 3.505
(2.128) 3.068
(1.317)* 3.964* (1.847)
3.800** (1.236)
Gender Equity -2.499 (3.940)
-3.803 (3.426)
Intergroup Cohesion
1.678 (2.512)
2.400 (2.405)
Local Community 0.219
(3.457) 1.424
(3.433)
Social Cohesion Measure 9.917
(4.882)* 12.770
(3.597)*** 5.275
(5.924) 9.214* (3.963)
Civic Engagement .483
(3.972) -1.374 (3.526)
Sub-Saharan Africa -2.330 (1.114)
-1.793 (0.704)
Latin America and Caribbean -0.879 (1.005)
-1.211 (0.693)
Constant -5.668 (5.024)
-8.682 (3.401)*
-0.621 (5.780)
-3.487 (3.898)
N 70 98 70 98
adj. r2 0.35 0.32 0.40 0.37
Dependent Variable: Per Capita Economic Growth Rate, 1990-9
* significant at the 0.05 level; ** significant at the 0.01 level; *** significant at the 0.001 level
Replication of Knack and Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation”
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Price level of investment goods, 1990 -.017
(.006)** -.008
(.003)* -0.010 (0.006)
-0.006 (0.003)
Real GDP per capita, 1990 -.0001 (.0001)
-.0001 (.00005)*
-0.000 (0.000)
-0.000** (0.000)
Primary School Enrollment, 1990 .004
(.020) -.0006 (.013)
0.004 (0.018)
-0.001 (0.012)
Secondary School Enrollment, 1990 -.007 (.020)
.003 (.014)
-0.007 (0.017)
-0.003 (0.013)
Former Eastern Bloc Country, 0-1 -3.039
(.994)** -3.504
(.740)*** -2.972** (0.896)
-3.477*** (0.665)
Inclusion of Minorities 3.505
(2.128) 3.068
(1.317)* 3.964* (1.847)
3.800** (1.236)
Gender Equity -2.499 (3.940)
-3.803 (3.426)
Intergroup Cohesion
1.678 (2.512)
2.400 (2.405)
Local Community 0.219
(3.457) 1.424
(3.433)
Social Cohesion Measure 9.917
(4.882)* 12.770
(3.597)*** 5.275
(5.924) 9.214* (3.963)
Civic Engagement .483
(3.972) -1.374 (3.526)
Sub-Saharan Africa -2.330 (1.114)
-1.793 (0.704)
Latin America and Caribbean -0.879 (1.005)
-1.211 (0.693)
Constant -5.668 (5.024)
-8.682 (3.401)*
-0.621 (5.780)
-3.487 (3.898)
N 70 98 70 98
adj. r2 0.35 0.32 0.40 0.37
Dependent Variable: Per Capita Economic Growth Rate, 1990-9
* significant at the 0.05 level; ** significant at the 0.01 level; *** significant at the 0.001 level
Replication of Knack and Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation”
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
Price level of investment goods, 1990 -.017
(.006)** -.008
(.003)* -0.010 (0.006)
-0.006 (0.003)
Real GDP per capita, 1990 -.0001 (.0001)
-.0001 (.00005)*
-0.000 (0.000)
-0.000** (0.000)
Primary School Enrollment, 1990 .004
(.020) -.0006 (.013)
0.004 (0.018)
-0.001 (0.012)
Secondary School Enrollment, 1990 -.007 (.020)
.003 (.014)
-0.007 (0.017)
-0.003 (0.013)
Former Eastern Bloc Country, 0-1 -3.039
(.994)** -3.504
(.740)*** -2.972** (0.896)
-3.477*** (0.665)
Inclusion of Minorities 3.505
(2.128) 3.068
(1.317)* 3.964* (1.847)
3.800** (1.236)
Gender Equity -2.499 (3.940)
-3.803 (3.426)
Intergroup Cohesion
1.678 (2.512)
2.400 (2.405)
Local Community 0.219
(3.457) 1.424
(3.433)
Social Cohesion Measure 9.917
(4.882)* 12.770
(3.597)*** 5.275
(5.924) 9.214* (3.963)
Civic Engagement .483
(3.972) -1.374 (3.526)
Sub-Saharan Africa -2.330 (1.114)
-1.793 (0.704)
Latin America and Caribbean -0.879 (1.005)
-1.211 (0.693)
Constant -5.668 (5.024)
-8.682 (3.401)*
-0.621 (5.780)
-3.487 (3.898)
N 70 98 70 98
adj. r2 0.35 0.32 0.40 0.37
Dependent Variable: Per Capita Economic Growth Rate, 1990-9
* significant at the 0.05 level; ** significant at the 0.01 level; *** significant at the 0.001 level
CPRplot: cohesion – growth90_99
Also included in model: price level of investment goods (1990), real GDP per capita (1990), primary school enrollment (1990), secondary school enrollment (1990), former Eastern bloc country (0/1)
South Africa
Mexico
Russian Federation
Argentina
United States
Italy
HungaryFrance
Australia
SwedenSpainCanada
NetherlandsUnited KingdomKorea, Rep.
Germany
Malta
Denmark
Belgium
Ireland
Japan
Norway
16
18
20
22
24
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
.75 .8 .85 .9 .95 1ncri_90
Knack and Keefer (1997) sample (n = 27), p = 0.003
CPRplot: cohesion – growth90_99
ColombiaSwaziland
KenyaBrazil
El Salvador
South Africa
Honduras
Guatemala
Venezuela, RB
Lesotho
Sri Lanka
Mozambique
Cote d'Ivoire
Nigeria
Uganda
Cameroon
Namibia
Ecuador
PeruJamaica
Papua New Guinea
MexicoRwanda
Zimbabwe
Tanzania
Burkina Faso
Sudan
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Nicaragua
Zambia
Cambodia
Russian Federation
Costa Rica
Burundi
Benin
Paraguay
Mongolia
Trinidad and Tobago
Ethiopia
Chile
St. Kitts and Nevis
TurkeyBotswana
TunisiaMali
Cyprus
Argentina
Madagascar
Senegal
Estonia
Romania
Malawi
Israel
PanamaUruguay
Algeria
Macedonia, FYR
Albania
Serbia and Montenegro
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Philippines
ThailandDjiboutiUzbekistan
Cape Verde
Cuba
Ghana
United States
Indonesia
Croatia
Jordan
Mauritius
TongaNepalFijiItaly
India
Morocco
Poland
Portugal
Samoa
Hungary
Saudi Arabia
SloveniaBahrainFrance
Malaysia
Australia
Greece
Sweden
Singapore
China
Luxembourg
Czech RepublicSpain
Syrian Arab Republic
Canada
Vietnam
Netherlands
New Zealand
United Kingdom
Korea, Rep.
Germany
Malta
DenmarkKuwait
Vanuatu
Iran, Islamic Rep.
United Arab Emirates
OmanQatarBelgiumHong Kong, China
Finland
Austria
Ireland
Switzerland
Japan
Norway
510
15
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
.6 .7 .8 .9 1ncri_90
Also included in model: price level of investment goods (1990), real GDP per capita (1990), primary school enrollment (1990), secondary school enrollment (1990), former Eastern bloc country (0/1)
SDI sample (n = 98),
p = 0.002
CPRplot: cohesion – growth90_99
ColombiaSwaziland
KenyaBrazil
El Salvador
South Africa
Honduras
Guatemala
Venezuela, RB
LesothoSri Lanka
Mozambique
Cote d'Ivoire
Nigeria
Uganda
CameroonNamibia
Ecuador
PeruJamaica
Papua New Guinea
MexicoRwanda
Zimbabwe
Tanzania
Burkina Faso
Sudan
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
NicaraguaZambia
Cambodia
Russian Federation
Costa Rica
Burundi
Benin
Paraguay
Mongolia
Trinidad and Tobago
Ethiopia
Chile
St. Kitts and Nevis
TurkeyBotswana
TunisiaMali
Cyprus
Argentina
Madagascar
Senegal
Estonia
Romania
Malawi
IsraelPanamaUruguay
Algeria
Macedonia, FYR
Albania
Serbia and Montenegro
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Philippines
ThailandDjiboutiUzbekistan
Cape Verde
Cuba
Ghana
United States
IndonesiaCroatia
Jordan
Mauritius
TongaNepalFijiItaly
India
Morocco
Poland
Portugal
Samoa
Hungary
Saudi Arabia
SloveniaBahrainFrance
Malaysia
Australia
Greece
Sweden
Singapore
China
Luxembourg
Czech RepublicSpain
Syrian Arab Republic
Canada
Vietnam
Netherlands
New Zealand
United Kingdom
Korea, Rep.
Germany
Malta
DenmarkKuwait
Vanuatu
Iran, Islamic Rep.
United Arab Emirates
OmanQatarBelgiumHong Kong, China
Finland
Austria
Ireland
SwitzerlandJapan
Norway
05
10
15
Com
ponent
plu
s r
esid
ual
.6 .7 .8 .9 1ncri_90
Also included in model: price level of investment goods (1990), real GDP per capita (1990), primary school enrollment (1990), secondary school enrollment (1990), former Eastern bloc country (0/1), dummy variables
for Latin America (0/1), Sub-Saharan Africa (0/1)
SDI sample (n = 98),
p = 0.022
Other Interesting Findings…
Scatterplot of Civic Activism (2005) and the Environmental Performance Index (2006)
Zambia
Vietnam
Uzbekistan
United States
United Kingdom
Ukraine
Uganda
Tunisia
Togo
Tanzania
Sw itzerland
Sw eden
Sudan
Spain
Slovenia
Russian Federation
Portugal
Poland
Peru
ParaguayPanama
PakistanNigeria
Niger
Netherlands
Myanmar
Mozambique
Moldova
Mexico
Mauritania
Mali
Malaysia
Liberia
Kyrgyz Republic
Korea, Rep.
Kenya
Jamaica
IndonesiaIndia
Haiti
Guinea
Germany
Gabon
France
Ethiopia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Cuba
Costa Rica
Belgium
Armenia
Angola
Algeria
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Environmental Performance Index
Civ
ic A
cti
vis
m
Partial Correlation (Residual Plot) between Intergroup Cohesion and (log) rate of deaths from natural disasters.
Sudan
Sri Lanka
India
Turkey
Algeria
Israel
Indonesia
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Pakistan
Guatemala
Mexico
Papua New Guinea
Nigeria
Bangladesh
Iran, Islamic Rep.Honduras
Sierra Leone
Dominican RepublicPhilippines
Ethiopia
Niger
Congo, Rep.
Nicaragua
SenegalRussian Federation
Peru
Georgia
South Af rica
Cameroon
Egy pt, Arab Rep.
Ecuador
France
China
Boliv ia
Uganda
Croatia
Venezuela, RB
United Kingdom
Colombia
Latv iaPanama
Albania
RomaniaGuinea
Bulgaria
Togo
Saudi Arabia
Keny a
Greece
Jordan
Mali
Spain
Brazil
JapanPoland
Paraguay
Botswana
Italy
Sy rian Arab Republic
Germany
Slov ak Republic
Zambia
Ukraine
Malay sia
Guy ana
Thailand
Uruguay
Morocco
GhanaNamibia
Madagascar
Moldov a
Cote d'Iv oire
Canada
Czech RepublicChile
Switzerland
Argentina
Hungary
Belarus
Vietnam
Korea, Rep.
United States
New Zealand
Norway
Singapore
Australia
Sweden
-10
-8-6
-4-2
0
Com
ponent plu
s r
esid
ual
0 .2 .4 .6 .8ncohesion
The Relationship between Intergroup Cohesion (1990) and Future Conflict Deaths (1991-2008), r = 0.57
Albania
AlgeriaAngola
ArgentinaAustraliaAustriaBahrain
Bangladesh
BelgiumBolivia BotswanaBrazilBulgaria
Cameroon
CanadaChile China
Colombia
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Congo, Rep.
Cote d'Ivoire
Czech Republic DenmarkDominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Estonia
Ethiopia
FinlandFranceGermanyGhanaGreece
GuatemalaGuinea
GuyanaHonduras Hungary Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
ItalyJapanJordanKenyaKorea, Rep. LatviaLebanon
Liberia
LithuaniaMadagascarMalaysia
Mali
Malta
Mexico
Morocco
Myanmar
Namibia New ZealandNicaragua
NigerNigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
PeruPhilippines
PolandPortugalRomania
Russian Federation
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
SingaporeSlovak Republic
Somalia
South Africa
Spain
Sri LankaSudan
SwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, China
Thailand
Togo
TurkeyUganda
United Kingdom
United States
Venezuela, RB
VietnamZambia05
10
15
.4 .42 .44 .46cohesion_1990
ln_totdeath Fitted values
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
Canada
New Zealand
ArgentinaSenegal
Uruguay
Israel
Congo, D.R.
Trinidad
Sweden
1. Make data available for use.
The Indices of Social Development compile over 200 indicators from 25 sources – a valuable resource
for researchers and analysts around the world.
Country Factsheets
END
Albania
Algeria
Argentina
Austria
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Chile
Croat iaCzech Republic
Denmark
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Estonia
Finland
France
GermanyGreece
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
ItalyJapan
Jordan
Korea, Rep.
Kyrgyz Republic
Latvia
Lithuania
M acedonia, FYR
M exico
M oldovaM orocco
Netherlands
Nigeria
Pakistan
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
RomaniaRussian Federat ion
Serbia and M ontenegro
Singapore
Slovak RepublicSlovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Tanzania
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Venezuela, RB
VietnamZimbabwe
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Polity IV Democracy Score
Avera
ge P
erc
en
tag
e o
f R
esp
on
den
ts T
akin
g P
art
in
Dem
on
str
ati
on
s, P
eti
tio
ns, an
d B
oyco
tts
Protest Behaviour and Democracy
ZimbabweVietnam
Venezuela, RB
United States
United Kingdom
Ukraine
Uganda
Turkey
Tanzania
Sweden
Spain
South Africa
SloveniaSlovak Republic
Singapore
Serbia and M ontenegro
Russian Federat ionRomania
Portugal
Poland
Philippines
Pakistan
Nigeria
Netherlands
M oroccoM oldova
M exico
M acedonia, FYR
Lithuania
Latvia
Kyrgyz Republic
Korea, Rep.
Jordan
JapanItaly
Israel
Ireland
Indonesia
India
Hungary
GreeceGermany
France
Finland
Estonia
Egypt, Arab Rep.
Denmark
Czech RepublicCroat ia
Chile
Canada
Bulgaria
Belgium
Bangladesh
Austria
Argentina
Algeria
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Iceland
Luxembourg
M alta
Peru
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
Density of INGO Networks
Avera
ge P
erc
en
tag
e o
f R
esp
on
den
ts T
akin
g P
art
in
Dem
on
str
ati
on
s, P
eti
tio
ns, an
d B
oyco
tts
Protest Behaviour and Density of International NGOs
Algeria
Angola
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belgium
Benin
Bolivia
Botswana
Brazil
BulgariaBurkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Canada
China
Colombia
Congo, Rep.
Costa Rica
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Denmark
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt, Arab Rep.
El Salvador
Estonia
Ethiopia
FinlandFrance
GabonGambia, The
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Guyana
Hungary
IndiaIndonesia
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Jordan
Kenya
Latvia
Libya
LithuaniaM acedonia, FYR
M adagascar
M alawi
M alaysia
M ali
M aurit ius
M exico
M oldova
M ongolia
M oroccoM ozambique
Namibia
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Thailand
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Vietnam
Zambia
Congo, Dem. Rep.
Iceland
Lebanon
Lesotho
Luxembourg
Peru
Suriname
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Newspapers per capita
Den
sit
y o
f IN
GO
netw
ork
s
Activism and INGOs