Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T23:21:32.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Do shared values promote social cohesion? If so, which? Evidence from Denmark

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Karen N. Breidahl*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Centre for Comparative Welfare Studies, Aalborg University, Aalborg Ø, Denmark
Nils Holtug
Affiliation:
Professor of Political Philosophy, Department for Media, Cognition and Communication, Centre for Advanced Migration Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen S, Denmark
Kristian Kongshøj
Affiliation:
Post-Doctoral Researcher, Department of Political Science, Centre for Comparative Welfare Studies, Aalborg University, Aalborg Ø, Denmark
*

Abstract

Social scientists and political theorists often claim that shared values are conducive to social cohesion, and trust and solidarity in particular. Furthermore, this idea is at the heart of what has been labeled the ‘national identity argument’, according to which religious and/or cultural diversity is a threat to the shared (national) values underpinning social cohesion and redistributive justice. However, there is no consensus among political theorists about what values we need to share to foster social cohesion and indeed, for example, nationalists, liberals, and multiculturalists provide different answers to this question. On the basis of a survey conducted in Denmark in 2014, this study empirically investigates the relation between, on the one hand, commitments to the community values of respectively conservative nationalism, liberal nationalism, liberal citizenship, and multiculturalism, and on the other, trust and solidarity. First, we investigate in what ways commitments to these four sets of values are correlated to trust and solidarity at the individual level and, then, whether the belief that others share one’s values is correlated to these aspects of social cohesion for individuals committed to these four sets of values. We find that conservative and liberal nationalism are negatively correlated to our different measures of trust and solidarity, whereas liberal citizenship and (in particular) multiculturalism are positively correlated. In broad terms, this picture remains when we control for a number of socio-economic factors and ideology (on a left-right scale). Finally, individuals who believe that others share their values do not, in general, have higher levels of trust and solidarity. Rather, this belief works in different ways when associated with different sets of community values.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, A. and Glaeser, E.L. (2004), Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe. A World of Difference, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ariely, G. (2014), ‘Does diversity erode social cohesion? Conceptual and methodological issues’, Political Studies 62(3): 573595.Google Scholar
Banting, K., Johnston, R., Kymlicka, W. and Soroka, S. (2006), ‘Do multicultural policies erode the welfare state? An empirical analysis’, in K. Banting and W. Kymlicka (ed.), Multiculturalism and the Welfare State. Recognition and Redistribution in Contemporary Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4991.Google Scholar
Barry, B. (2001), Culture and Equality. An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Burke, E. (1790), Reflections on the Revolution in France, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Citrin, J., Wong, C. and Duff, B. (2001), ‘The meaning of American national identity’, in R. Ashmore, L. Jussim and D. Wilder (eds), Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Resolution, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 71100.Google Scholar
Crepaz, M. (2006), ‘“If you are my brother I may give you a dime!” Public opinion on multiculturalism, trust, and the welfare state’, in K. Banting and W. Kymlicka (eds), Multiculturalism and the Welfare State. Recognition and Redistribution in Contemporary Democracies, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 92120.Google Scholar
Delhey, J., Newton, K. and Welzel, C. (2011), ‘How general is trust in “most people”? Solving the radius of trust problem’, American Sociological Review 76(5): 786807.Google Scholar
Delhey, J., Newton, K. and Welzel, C. (2014), ‘The radius of trust problem remains resolved’, American Sociological Review 79(6): 12601265.Google Scholar
Hjerm, M. and Schnabel, A. (2012), ‘How much heterogeneity can the welfare state endure? The influence of heterogeneity on attitudes to the welfare state’, Nations and Nationalism 18(2): 346369.Google Scholar
Holtug, N. (Forthcoming), Identity, causality and social cohesion. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1227697 Google Scholar
Honohan, I. (2010), ‘Republican requirements for access to citizenship’, in G. Calder, P. Cole and J. Seglow (eds) Citizenship Acquisition and National Belonging, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 91104.Google Scholar
Hooghe, M. (2007), ‘Social capital and diversity. Generalized trust, social cohesion and regimes of diversity’, Canadian Journal of Political Science 40(3): 709732.Google Scholar
Hooghe, M., Reeskens, T. and Stolle, D. (2007), ‘Diversity, multiculturalism and social cohesion: trust and ethnocentrism in European societies’, in K. Banting, T.J. Courchene and L.F. Seidle (eds), Art of the State: Belonging, Diversity, Recognition and Shared Citizenship in Canada, Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy, pp. 124.Google Scholar
Johnston, R., Banting, K., Kymlicka, W. and Soroka, S. (2010), ‘National identity and support for the welfare state’, Canadian Journal of Political Science 43(2): 249277.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, W. (1995), Multicultural Citizenship, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, W. (2001), Politics in the Vernacular. Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martinez-Herrera, E. (2004), ‘Liberal-nationalist theory, political confidence and support for the welfare state: evidence from Britain’. EUI Working Paper SPS No. 200408, Department of Political and Social Sciences, European University Institute, San Domenico di Fiesole.Google Scholar
Martinez-Herrera, E. (2010), ‘The unbearable lightness of British “liberal nationalism”’, in I. Karolwski and A. Suszycki (eds), Multiplicity of Nationalism in Contemporary Europe, Lanham: Lexington Books, pp. 3154.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (1995), On Nationality, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (1998), ‘The left, the nation-state and the European citizenship’, Dissent 45(3): 4752.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2004), ‘Social justice in multicultural societies’, in P. van Parijs (ed.), Cultural Diversity Versus Economic Solidarity, Brussels: De Boeck University Press, pp. 1331.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2006), ‘Multiculturalism and the welfare state: theoretical reflections’, in K. Banting and W. Kymlicka (eds), Multiculturalism and the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 323338.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2014), ‘Solidarity and its sources’, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Miller, D. and Ali, S. (2014), ‘Testing the national identity argument’, European Political Science Review 6(2): 237259.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. (2012), Multiculturalism. A Critical Introduction, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Putnam, R.D. (2000), Bowling Alone. The Collapse and Revival of American Community, New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scruton, R. (1990), ‘In defence of the nation’, in R. Scruton (ed.), The Philosopher on Dover Beach, Manchester: Carcanet, pp. 299328.Google Scholar
Shayo, M. (2009), ‘A model of social identity with an application to political economy: nation, class, and redistribution’, American Political Science Review 103(2): 147174.Google Scholar
Svallfors, S. (2010), ‘Public attitudes’, in F.G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis, H. Obinger and C. Pierson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 241251.Google Scholar
Theiss-Morse, E. (2009), Who Counts as an American? The Boundaries of National Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Torpe, L. (2012), Det stærke samfund: Social kapital i Scandinavian: Frydenlund Academic.Google Scholar
Torpe, L. and Lolle, H. (2011), ‘Identifying social trust in cross-country analysis: do we really measure the same?’, Social Indicators Research 103(3): 481500.Google Scholar
Uslaner, E. (2002), The Moral Foundations of Trust, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Uslaner, E. (2012), Segregation and Mistrust. Diversity, Isolation, and Social Cohesion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van der Meer, T. and Tolsma, J. (2014), ‘Ethnic diversity and its effects on social cohesion’, Annual Review of Sociology 40: 459478.Google Scholar
Voci, A. (2006), ‘The link between identification and in-group favouratism: effects of threat to social identity and trust-related emotions’, British Journal of Social Psychology 45: 265284.Google Scholar
Wright, M. and Reeskens, T. (2013), ‘Of what cloth are the ties that bind? National identity and support for the welfare state across 29 European countries’, Journal of European Public Policy 20(10): 14431463.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Breidahl supplementary material

Table A2

Download Breidahl supplementary material(File)
File 15.6 KB