Vasil'eva Ekaterina Nikolaevna, Candidate of sociological sciences, associate professor, sub-department of social work and pedagogy, Volgograd State University (100 Universitetskiy avenue, Volgograd, Russia), firstname.lastname@example.org
Poltavskaya Mariya Borisovna, Candidate of sociological sciences, associate professor, sub-department of sociology, Volgograd State University (100 Universitetskiy avenue, Volgograd, Russia), email@example.com
Background. The issue of measuring social capital is of debatable nature. The researchers propose different indicators depending on their methodological settings. The purpose of this article is to review methods to measure social capital and make original proposals.
Materials and methods. The aim of this article is to analyze the social capital of one of the regions of Russia (Volgograd region); there is a proposal to include two factors as key indicators for measuring social capital – economic and social activity of population. The data on economic activity of population are illustrated by the statistical indicators of the region. Conclusions about social activity are drawn by comparing statistical data on the number of socially oriented nonprofit organizations (NPOs) and empirical research data, identifying the level of involvement of the population in their activity. The authors used the results of mass questionnaire survey conducted among different groups of population of Volgograd region (sample volume – 1,000 people, sample type – territorial, quota).
Results. The social capital of Volgograd region is developed enough to be attractive to investors. The region has a great potential taking the average position on many indicators.
Conclusions. Formation and development of social capital in the regions should occur through informing the population about the activities of socially oriented NPOs, creation of conditions for implementation of projects of socially oriented NGOs, development of entrepreneurial activities and solving unemployment problems. Social capital is forming on an ongoing basis; therefore, it is necessary to carry out continuous monitoring of its formation, and to choose specific indicators in order to reduce the cost of research.
1. Putnam R. D. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993.
2. Fukuyama F. Foreign Affairs. 1995, no. 74 (5), pp. 89–103.
3. Knack S., Keefer Ph. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1997, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 1251–1288.
4. Bjornskov Ch. European Journal of Political Economy. 2006, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 22–40.
5. Cusak T. European Journal of Political Research. 1999, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–34.
6. Marsh C. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratisation [Democratization: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization]. 2002, vol. 10, issue 1, pp. 19–36.
7. Twigg Judith L. Social Capital and Social Cohesion in Post Soviet Russia. Ed. by Judith L. Twigg, K. Schecter. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe, Ink., 2003, pp. 168–188.
8. Lapin N. I. Russian Social Science Revie. 2004, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 4–21.
9. Nemirovskiy V. G., Nemirovskaya A. V. Sotsial'naya struktura i sotsial'nyy kapital naseleniya Krasnoyarskogo kraya: monogr. [Social structure and social capital of population of Krasnoyarsk region: monograph]. Krasnoyarsk: Sibirskiy federal'nyy universitet, 2011, 159 p.
10. Radaev V. V. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost' [Social sciences and modern times]. 2003, no. 2, pp. 5–16.