Measures of Social Cohesion

Dickès, Paul; Borsenberger, Monique; Fleury, Charles

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_3725

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rothstein [54] explained differences in success in containing the virus between Nordic countries and Italy by higher levels of social and political trust in Nordic countries. As social cohesion includes trust [55], these findings are in agreement with the above cited Fath, Dean and Katzmair's hypothesis [1]. There were also many examples of social solidarity during the first cycle.…”

Section: Social Cohesionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Croatian Crisis Management System's Response to Covid-19 Pandemic Through the Lens of a Systemic Resilience Model

Srbljinović¹,

Božić

Fath

2020

Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyse the Croatian crisis management system's response to COVID-19 pandemic in terms of Fath, Dean, and Katzmair's [1] model of resilience in social systems. We find that the Croatian crisis management system has successfully completed one cycle of the model. However, if the system is to achieve resilience, it also needs to replace the regime from before the crisis with a new regime that will simultaneously enable a life of relative normalcy and contain an excessive spread of the virus. Strengthening social cohesion and more bottom-up, emergent leadership might facilitate the search for a new regime. Small, local outbreaks represent small-scale disturbances that provide opportunities for the development of cohesion and bottom-up leadership from local, county, municipal and city-levels to the national level. The model used in this article better conveys the underlying complexity of crisis management systems than "the hammer and the dance" model, whereas the latter is better suited for public communication. Future work should extend this case study in terms of modelling approaches, the sample of countries, and the time covered. It can also be extended to lower, sub-national, as well as higher, supra-national levels, such as the EU.

show abstract

Section: Social Cohesionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Weakened social cohesion may be one of the reasons why the second cycle was so intense in terms of new cases. In future research, our so far largely anecdotal evidence should be backed by more rigorous measurements [55] and/or use of aggregate indices of social cohesion [61,62].…”

Section: Social Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Croatian Crisis Management System's Response to Covid-19 Pandemic Through the Lens of a Systemic Resilience Model

Srbljinović¹,

Božić

Fath

2020

Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To approach social cohesion, we orient our research along a definition by Chan et al (2006) as "a state of affairs concerning both the vertical and the horizontal interactions among members of society as characterized by a set of attitudes and norms that includes trust, a sense of belonging and the willingness to participate and help, as well as their behavioral manifestations." We advance this definition through its systematic threefold constitution into (1) shared identities, (2) mutual trust, and (3) perceived equalitieswhich have been widely discussed in the social cohesion literature (Bernard, 1999;Chan et al, 2006;Green et al, 2009;Dickes et al, 2014;Dragolov et al, 2016). These three constituents will be relevant when identifying the qualitative state and potential approach of a TP within the regional social system.…”

Section: The Regional Social Systemmentioning

confidence: 98%

Describing complex interactions of social-ecological systems for tipping point assessments: an analytical framework

Froese,

Andrino,

Giudice

et al. 2023

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans play an interconnecting role in social-ecological systems (SES), they are part of these systems and act as agents of their destruction and regulation. This study aims to provide an analytical framework, which combines the concept of SES with the concept of tipping dynamics. As a result, we propose an analytical framework describing relevant dynamics and feedbacks within SES based on two matrixes: the “tipping matrix” and the “cross-impact matrix.” We take the Southwestern Amazon as an example for tropical regions at large and apply the proposed analytical framework to identify key underlying sub-systems within the study region: the soil ecosystem, the household livelihood system, the regional social system, and the regional climate system, which are interconnected through a network of feedbacks. We consider these sub-systems as tipping elements (TE), which when put under stress, can cross a tipping point (TP), resulting in a qualitative and potentially irreversible change of the respective TE. By systematically assessing linkages and feedbacks within and between TEs, our proposed analytical framework can provide an entry point for empirically assessing tipping point dynamics such as “tipping cascades,” which means that the crossing of a TP in one TE may force the tipping of another TE. Policy implications: The proposed joint description of the structure and dynamics within and across SES in respect to characteristics of tipping point dynamics promotes a better understanding of human-nature interactions and critical linkages within regional SES that may be used for effectively informing and directing empirical tipping point assessments, monitoring or intervention purposes. Thereby, the framework can inform policy-making for enhancing the resilience of regional SES.

show abstract

“…This also speaks to the multi-level elements of cohesion. Chan et al ( 2006) argue cohesion has micro, mezzo (meso) and macro elements, that it is not just a case of individuals integrating within states, although Dickes et al (2014) argue that addressing the meso level of cohesion in particular is difficult.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Green et al (2009) focus instead on trust, tolerance, active citizenship and solidarity. Dickes et al (2014) adapt both Bernard (1999) and Dickes et al (2010) to create a two by two table of possible measures, distinguishing between political and socio-cultural dimensions as well as attitudinal and behavioural elements. This includes a sense of confidence and satisfaction in institutions (political/attitudinal), participation and political interest (political/behavioural), solidarity (sociocultural/attitudinal) and a measure of involvement in various associations that are all intended to serve as proxies for common values and a sense of belonging.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%