4.6 Article

Social Capital and Its Contingent Value in Poverty Reduction: Evidence from Western China

期刊

WORLD DEVELOPMENT
卷 93, 期 -, 页码 350-361

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.034

关键词

poverty; social capital; appropriable social organization; institutional trust; Asia; China

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71302031]
  2. Cisco-Guanghua Leadership Institute
  3. ShanghaiTech University Faculty Start-up Fund [F-0204-14-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous literature suggests that social capital at the individual and community levels can contribute significantly to poverty reduction. In this paper we empirically investigate the relationship between social capital and households' probability of living under poverty. We used a large-scale cross-sectional survey in western Chinese provinces to explore the impact of households' social capital on four different poverty measures. Our results indicate that in addition to the structural and relational properties of households' social networks, the types of resources embedded in these networks such as business ties, political ties, and appropriable social organizations can contribute significantly to poverty reduction. Moreover, since our study is situated in China's emerging economy context, we can thus further explore how variations in macrolevel institutions affect the usefulness of various social resources in reducing poverty. We discovered that the quality of local institutions as measured by local residents' trust toward the institutions can modulate the effectiveness of political ties and appropriable social organizations, such that the impacts of political ties and appropriable social organizations tend to diminish in communities with higher level of institutional trust than they are in communities with lower level of institutional trust, while business ties turn out to be effective in alleviating poverty in both high-and low-trust communities. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据