Dietlind Stolle

Politics in the Supermarket: Political Consumerism as a Form of Political Participation

Both anecdotal and case-study evidence have long suggested that consumer behavior such as the buying or boycotting of products and services for political and ethical reasons can take on political significance. Despite recent claims that such behavior has become more widespread in recent years, political consumerism has not been studied systematically in survey research on political participation. Through the use of a pilot survey conducted among 1015 Canadian, Belgian, and Swedish students, we ascertain whether political consumerism is a sufficiently consistent behavioral pattern to be measured and studied meaningfully. The data from this pilot survey allow us to build a “political consumerism index” incorporating attitudinal, behavioral, and frequency measurements. Our analysis of this cross-national student sample suggests that political consumerism is primarily a tool of those who are distrustful of political institutions. However, political consumers have more trust in other citizens, and they are disproportionately involved in checkbook organizations. They also tend to score highly on measures of political efficacy and post-materialism. We strongly suggest including measurements of political consumerism together with other emerging forms of activism in future population surveys on political participation.

Are All Associations Alike? Member Diversity, Associational Type, and the Creation of Social Capital

Associational memberships have become the indicator of choice for examining the formation and destruction of social capital. Memberships in associations are believed to create generalized interpersonal trust, which can be used as a lubricant that makes possible a variety of forms of social interaction and cooperation. Clearly, not all types of associations will be equally effective in their relative capacity to create generalized, or public, social capital. Each indicator of social capital that we examine is positively related to associational membership. However, some association memberships, particularly in cultural groups, are correlated with a wide range of forms of social capital. The diversity of an association also has an effect on the connection between social capital and association memberships. Homogeneous associations are less likely to inculcate high levels of generalized trust and community reciprocity among their members. These results indicate the need for further specification of the social capital theory.

When Does Diversity Erode Trust? Neighborhood Diversity, Interpersonal Trust and the Mediating Effect of Social Interactions:

This article contributes to the debate about the effects of ethnic diversity on social cohesion, particularly generalized trust. The analysis relies on data from both the ‘Citizenship, Involvement, Democracy’ (CID) survey in the US and the ‘Equality, Security and Community Survey’ (ESCS) in Canada. Our analysis, one of the first controlled cross-national comparisons of small-unit contextual variation, confirms recent findings on the negative effect of neighborhood diversity on white majorities across the two countries. Our most important finding, however, is that not everyone is equally sensitive to context. Individuals who regularly talk with their neighbors are less influenced by the racial and ethnic character of their surroundings than people who lack such social interaction. This finding challenges claims about the negative effects of diversity on trust – at least, it suggests that the negative effects so prevalent in existing research can be mediated by social ties.

The State and Social Capital: An Institutional Theory of Generalized Trust

The purpose of this article is to present an alternative theory on the generation of social capital. In the discussion about the sources of social capital it has been stressed that generalized trust is built up by the citizens themselves through a culture that permeates the networks and organizations of civil society. Since this approach has run into conceptual problems and has produced only mixed empirical evidence, we like to highlight instead how social capital is embedded in and linked to formal political and legal institutions. Not all political institutions matter equally, however. In fact, we argue that trust thrives most in societies with effective, impartial and fair street-level bureaucracies. The article presents the causal mechanism between these institutional characteristics and generalized trust, and illustrates its validity in a crossnational context.

RACE AND THE CITY: Neighborhood Context and the Development of Generalized Trust

Previous research has indicated that socio-economic and racial characteristics of an individuals environment influence not only group consciousness and solidarity, but also affect his or her views toward minority or majority groups. Missing from this research is a consideration of how context, social interaction, and interracial experiences combine to shape more general psychological orientations such as generalized trust. In this study we address this gap in the literature by conducting a neighborhood-level analysis that examines how race, racial attitudes, social interactions, and residential patterns affect generalized trust. Our findings suggest not only that the neighborhood context plays an important role in shaping civic orientations, but that the diversity of interaction settings is a key condition for the development of generalized trust.

Politics, Products, and Markets: Exploring Political Consumerism Past and Present

the City University of Stockholm in 2001, captures the messiness of political consumerism both past and present. In their introduction, the editors define political consumerism as “the use of market purchases by individuals, groups, and institutions, who want to take responsibility for political, economic, and societal developments” (p. v). From my reading, the chapters wrestle with three overarching themes: (1) the individual versus collective functions of political consumerism, (2) the relative merits of different strategies for increasing the effectiveness of consumerist politics, and (3) using versus legitimizing the market as an arena for citizenship. Several chapters reveal a critical distinction between political consumerism that is motivated by individual or collective concerns. Bente Halkier’s chapter addresses a small sample of Danish consumers who are concerned with food safety issues and reveals that even the most identifiably political consumers did not have strong societal motivations. Rather, these consumers were taking personal responsibility for their individual and families’ food safety risks, and Halkier suggests that their actions fall short of the traditional tripartite framework (combining agency, community, and influence) for political action. On the other hand, Cheryl Greenberg’s and David Vogel’s chapters about historical boycott and disinvestment campaigns clearly illustrate direct attempts to change collective circumstances and public policies, whether fighting against African American oppression, South African apartheid, or the Vietnam War. Other chapters illustrate a complex interplay between individual and collective functions. For instance, Jørgen Goul Anderson and Mette Tobiasen report on the 2000 Danish Citizenship Study, arguing that political consumerism is linked to other political actions with collective intent, such as signing petitions and donating money, but not necessarily to protesting or other forms of collective action. They suggest that political consumers represent a hybrid mix of collective solidarity and individualized action. While they may draw the line in different places, all of these authors seem to accept that political consumerism is more than simply consumption guided by individualized noneconomic rationalities and that it needs to have some sort of collective component. Turning to effectiveness, Paul Kennedy’s chapter tackles the relative merits of mass and niche political consumerism with his study of “radical” versus “mainstream” green or ethical enterprises in Britain in the mid-1990s. His study reveals a partial convergence between the two categories owing to mainstream firms’ need to legitimize their ethical credentials against their radical competitors. Other chapters explore product standards and certification as means of institutionalizing consumers’ social and environmental concerns. Franck Cochoy uses the French standards movement of the early twentieth century to discuss the politics of standards. He shows that it is possible “to fix politics directly into products” (p. 158), yet cautions that standardization institutions do not always live up to their participatory principles. Andrew Jordan, Rüdiger K. W. Wurzel, Anythony R. Zito, and Lars Brückner’s chapter traces the development of the German eco-labeling scheme and shows that it has been more successful than other European ecolabels in generating a race to maintain market share by companies that operate within and export to Germany. The issue of relative legitimacy and influence is also taken up by Benjamin Cashore, Graeme Auld, and Deanna Newsom. These authors describe the Politics, Products, and Markets: Exploring Political Consumerism Past and Present

Ethnic diversity and generalized trust in Europe: a cross-national multilevel study

While most current research documents a negative relation between ethnic diversity and generalized trust, it has to be acknowledged that these results often originate from one-country analyses in North America. In this article, attitudinal measurements from the European Social Survey are combined with Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development data on migration patterns, thus examining the relationship between diversity and trust in a comparative manner across 20 European countries. More fine-grained measurements of diversity (including type and rise of diversity over time and legal status of immigrants) are included in a multilevel model. At the individual level, most of the familiar relations were confirmed. At the country level, hardly any indicators for migration or diversity proved to be strongly and consistently related to generalized trust. Results suggest that the pessimistic conclusions about the negative effects of ethnic diversity on generalized trust cannot be confirmed at the aggregate level across European countries.

Inaccurate, exceptional, one-sided or irrelevant? The debate about the alleged decline of social capital and civic engagement in western societies

In his 1790 address to the Academie Francaise in Paris, Condorcet noted that every new generation has a tendency to accuse itself of being less civic-minded than previous cohorts. Two centuries later, this argument has once again regained front-page status. The debate is currently focused on the question of whether or not social capital and civic engagement are declining in Western societies. In his academic best-seller Bowling Alone , Robert Putnam argues that younger age cohorts, socialized in the prosperous economic conditions of the 1960s and onwards, are less inclined to engage in community life and in politics, and also less likely to trust their fellow citizens. By contrast, the ‘long civic generation’, born roughly between 1910 and 1940, is portrayed as much more motivated in these respects. They readily volunteer in community projects, read newspapers and take on more social responsibilities. In this view, a process of generational replacement is responsible for a steady decline of social capital and civic engagement in American society. As the long civic generation is replaced by younger age cohorts, the social capital stock of American communities slowly diminishes. The indicators used to substantiate this claim are numerous and diverse: measures for voter turnout, attendance of club meetings, generalized trust, the number of common family dinners, the number of card games played together, and even respect for traffic rules. All of these attitudes and behaviours, it is argued, depict a significant downward trend. Although Putnam is by far the most vocal of all scholars in the ‘decline of social capital’ choir, he certainly is not the only author describing an erosion of traditional societal relations.

Why Do Bowling and Singing Matter? Group Characteristics, Membership, and Generalized Trust

Although membership in voluntary associations has been presumed to be a central element in the building of social capital, micro-level knowledge about whether and how voluntary associations make their members more trusting and cooperative has been lacking. The link between trust and involvement in associations in Germany and Sweden was explored by means of a questionnaire concerning traits of individuals and of the associational groups to which they belong. The analysis of the resulting data set considered the extent to which various group characteristics (such as demographic diversity, in-group trust, and engagement level) are related to the generalized trust of the members. The results indicate that more diverse, more engaged voluntary associations, and those with weak ties, indeed accommodate more trusting people. In particular, time spent in groups with foreigners, or in groups with weaker ties, affectsthe generalized trust levels of the members.

Social Capital, Impartiality and the Welfare State: An Institutional Approach

This chapter sheds more light on the sources of one important aspect of social capital, namely generalized trust. Most discussions about the sources of social capital thus far have been focused on the realm of civil society. The more people are engaged in voluntary associations and informal networks, the more trusting toward other people they will become (Putnam 1993, 2000). This approach is problematic because there is no successful theory of social capital that links aspects of civic life and trust at the micro- and macrolevels. Previous chapters have shown that, at the microlevel, voluntary associations do not necessarily work as producers of civic values and attitudes, such as generalized trust (e.g., Mayer, Wollebaek and Selle this volume; see also Stolle 2001; Uslaner 2002). In addition, it is difficult to distinguish between networks that produce distrust toward others, for example criminal or racist organizations, and networks that potentially produce trust, such as Parent-Teacher Associations or the Boy Scouts (however, Hooghe tries to make this distinction in this volume).