Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of neighbourhood and municipality characteristics on social cohesion in the Netherlands

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Politica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Up till now, a systematic test of the impact of theoretically relevant locality characteristics on social cohesion has been lacking in Europe. In this paper, we investigated the impact of a wide array of characteristics of Dutch neighbourhoods and municipalities on contact frequency with one's neighbours, tolerance to neighbours from a different race, generalized social trust and volunteering. Based on the homophily proposition, we expected that ethnic and economic heterogeneity in Dutch localities negatively affect these indicators of social cohesion. We also expected that poor localities, localities with high crime rates and localities that suffer from high residential mobility rates offer their residents less favourable circumstances for social cohesion to arise. For our individual level data, we used the survey ‘Culturele Veranderingen 2004’, which contains 2949 individuals living in 503 neighbourhoods and 245 municipalities. Economic deprivation (at the neighbourhood level) is most consistently negatively related to social cohesion. We did not find a consistent negative impact of ethnic heterogeneity on social cohesion. We conclude that not all aspects of social cohesion are affected in the same way by neighbourhood and municipality characteristics and that the impact of these characteristics on social cohesion depends on residents’ income and educational level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. More specifically, we are more confident to find a detrimental effect of (ethnic and economic) heterogeneity, poverty, crime and residential mobility within localities on social cohesion among the poor and low educated than among the rich and high educated.

  2. These are singing/music, sports, hobby, political, interest, religious organizations, schools, neighbours/elderly/handicapped, action groups and local community organizations.

  3. The Herfindahl Index is given by: HI=∑ i p i 2, where p i is the proportion of the respective distinguished ethnic group within the locale. The measure of ethnic heterogeneity is obtained by taking the complement of the HI: 1 – HI.

  4. This operationalization causes an underestimation of the income inequality within neighbourhoods and municipalities and our tests regarding the impact of income inequality should be considered conservative. The definition of the Gini-coefficient as the mean of absolute differences between all pair of individuals is given by: , where y is the observed income, n the total individuals and y bar the mean income. We calculated the Gini-coefficient by the SPSS-script provided on Raynald's SPSS Tools website (http://www.spsstools.net/). As said before, instead of income data at the individual level we use information on the mean income level of the complete zip code to construct the Gini-coefficient. We weighted the complete zip codes by the number of residents.

  5. We would like to thank L. Prins and his colleagues of the Dutch police force (Korps Landelijke Politiediensten, Dienst Nationale Recherce Informatie, Onderzoek en Analyse) for making these data available to us.

  6. We applied hierarchical models to obtain correct standard errors of the contextual effects. Since our neighbourhoods are not randomly selected, the intra class correlations are not that informative. However, from Appendix C we learn that the variances at the higher levels are substantial. To a large extent this variance is due to composition effects.

  7. Note that neither STATA nor R has a build in stepwise model selection procedure. We thank Rense Nieuwenhuis for the help during the estimation procedure in R. See http://www.rensenieuwenhuis.nl/ for the R script we used to come to our final models as presented in Table 2.

  8. One plausible theoretical explanation that economic inequality is important at the country level but apparently not at lower contextual levels is that the effect of economic inequality at the country level is mainly driven by institutional fairness perceptions and not so much by the cultural dissimilarity that results from differences in economic resources. These perceptions of fairness may be forged mainly in national public spheres by political parties and the media and not in local environments such as neighbourhoods and municipalities.

References

  • Alesina, A. and La Ferrara, E. (2000) Participation in heterogeneous communities. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115 (3): 847–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina, A. and La Ferrara, E. (2002) Who trusts others. Journal of Public Economics 85 (2): 207–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G.W. (1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C.J. and Paskeviciute, A. (2006) How ethnic and linguistic heterogeneity influence the prospects for civil society: A comparative study of citizenship behavior. Journal of Politics 68: 783–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P.M. (1977) Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, J.D. and Robert, S. (2000) Neighbourhood socioeconomic status and perceptions of self-efficacy. Sociological Perspectives 43: 117–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bobo, L. (1999) Prejudice as group position: Micro-foundations of a sociological approach to racism and race relations. Journal of Social Issues 3: 445–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brisson, D.S. and Usher, C.L. (2005) Bonding social capital in low-income neighbourhoods. Family Relations 54: 664–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (2000) Social identity theory: Past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology 30: 745–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, C.R., Feinberg, S.L. and Dietz, R.D. (2004) The paradox of social organization: Networks, collective efficacy, and violent crime in urban neighbourhoods. Social Forces 83 (2): 503–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coenders, M. and Scheepers, P. (1998) Support for ethnic discrimination in the Netherlands 1979–1993: Effects of period, cohort and individual characteristics. European Sociological Review 14: 405–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffé, H. and Geys, B. (2006) Community heterogeneity: A burden for the creation of social capital? Social Science Quarterly 87 (5): 1053–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coser, L. (1956) The Functions of Social Conflict. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delhey, J. and Newton, K. (2005) Predicting cross-national levels of social trust: Global pattern or Nordic exceptionalism? European Sociological Review 21: 311–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gesthuizen, M., Van der Meer, T. and Scheepers, P. (2009) Ethnic diversity and social capital in Europe: Tests of Putnam's thesis in European countries. Scandinavian Political Studies 32 (2): 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. (2005) Social Capital. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, M., Reeskens, T., Stolle, D. and Trappers, A. (2009) Ethnic diversity and generalized trust in Europe: A cross-national multilevel study. Comparative Political Studies 42 (2): 198–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalmijn, M. (1998) Intermarriage and homogamy: Causes, patterns, trends. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knack, S. and Keefer, P. (1997) Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 122 (4): 1251–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancee, B. and Dronkers, J. (2008) Etnische diversiteit, social vertrouwen in de buurt en contact van allochtonen en autochtonen met de buren. Migrantenstudies 4: 143–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. and Merton, R.K. (1954) Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In: M. Berger, Th. Abel and Ch.H. Page (eds.) Freedom and Control in Modern Society. New York: Van Ostrand, pp. 18–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehning, P.B. (1998) Towards a multicultural civil society: The role of social capital and democratic citizenship. Government and Opposition 33: 221–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Letki, N. (2008) Does diversity erode social cohesion? Social capital and race in British neighbourhoods. Political Studies 56 (1): 99–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Pickles, A. and Savage, M. (2005) Social capital and social trust in Britain in the late 1990s. European Sociological Review 21 (1): 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massey, D.S., Gross, A.B. and Shibuya, K. (1994) Migration, segregation, and the geographical concentration of poverty. American Sociological Review 59: 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L. and Cook, J.M. (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27: 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J.E. and Mendelberg, T. (2000) Reconsidering the environmental determinants of white racial attitudes. American Journal of Political Science 44 (3): 574–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olzak, S. (1992) The Dynamic of Ethnic Competition and Conflict. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T.F. and Tropp, L.R. (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (5): 751–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1998) Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24: 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.D. (1993) Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.D. (2007) E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century, the 2006 Johan Skytte prize lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies 30: 137–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quillian, L. (1995) Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American Sociological Review 60 (4): 586–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld, R., Messner, S.F. and Baumer, E.P. (1999) Social capital and homocide. Social Forces 80 (1): 283–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, C.E., Mirowsky, J. and Pribesh, S. (2001) Powerlessness and the amplification of threat: Neighbourhood disadvantage, disorder, and mistrust. American Sociological Review 66 (4): 568–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, B. and Uslaner, E.M. (2005) All for one: Equality, corruption, and social trust. World Politics 58 (1): 41–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiter, S. and De Graaf, N.D. (2009) Socio-economic payoffs of voluntary association involvement: A Dutch life course study. European Sociological Review 25 (3).

  • Sampson, R.J. and Groves, W.B. (1989) Community structure and crime: Testing social disorganisation theory. American Journal of Sociology 94 (4): 774–802.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R.J., Morenoff, J.D. and Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002) Assessing ‘neighbourhood effects’: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology 28: 443–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheepers, P., Gijsberts, M. and Coenders, M. (2002) Ethnic exclusionism in European countries. Public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review 18 (1): 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semyonov, M., Raijman, R. and Gorodzeisky, A. (2006) The rise of anti-foreigner sentiment in European societies, 1988–2000. American Sociological Review 71 (3): 426–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M.L. and Newman, K. (2001) Urban poverty after the truly disadvantaged: The rediscovery of the family, neighbourhood and culture. Annual Review of Sociology 27: 23–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, P.M., Peri, P., De Fiqueiredo, R. and Piazza, P. (2000). The Outsider. Prejudice and Politics in Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T.A.B. and Bosker, R.J. (1999) Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modelling. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolle, D., Soroka, S. and Johnston, R. (2008) When does diversity erode trust? Neighbourhood diversity, interpersonal trust and the mediating effect of social interactions. Political Studies 56 (1): 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, W.G. (1959 [1906]) Folkways. A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolsma, J., Lubbers, M. and Coenders, M. (2008) Ethnic competition and opposition to ethnic intermarriage in the Netherlands: A multi-level approach. European Sociological Review 24 (2): 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uslaner, E. and Brown, M. (2005) Inequality, trust, and civic engagement. American Politics Research 33: 868–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Meer, T., Scheepers, P. and Te Grotenhuis, M. (2009) States as the molders of informal relations: A multilevel test on social participation in 20 Western countries. European Societies 11 (2): 233–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oorschot, W. and Arts, W. (2005) The social capital of European welfare states: The crowding out hypothesis revisited. Journal of European Social Policy 15: 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voas, D., Crockett, A. and Olson, D.V.A. (2002) Religious pluralism and participation: Why previous research is wrong. American Sociological Review 67 (2): 212–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Völker, B., Flap, H. and Lindenberg, S. (2007) When are neighbourhoods communities? Community in Dutch neighbourhoods. European Sociological Review 23 (1): 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (2000) Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology 26 (1): 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W.J. (1987) The Truly Disadvantaged. The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Thomas van Aquinostraat 4, PO Box 9104, Nijmegen, 6500HE, The Netherlands

    Jochem Tolsma

  2. Netherlands Institute for Social Research (SCP), The Netherlands

    Tom van der Meer

  3. Department of Social Science Research Methodology, Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Maurice Gesthuizen

Authors
  1. Jochem Tolsma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom van der Meer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maurice Gesthuizen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jochem Tolsma.

Appendices

Appendix A

See Table A.

Table a1 Descriptive statistics
Full size table

Appendix B

See Table B.

Table b1 Correlations between locality characteristicsa
Full size table

Appendix C

See Table C.

Table c1 Variance components of hierarchical random intercept regression models explaining social cohesion
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tolsma, J., van der Meer, T. & Gesthuizen, M. The impact of neighbourhood and municipality characteristics on social cohesion in the Netherlands. Acta Polit 44, 286–313 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2009.6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2009.6

Keywords

Search

Navigation