Social Capital, Economic Development, and Homicide: A Cross-National Investigation

Abstract

This article draws from an ongoing debate over explanations of homicide. Within this debate, we investigate the pro-social effects of civil society and social capital. Few cross-national studies explore whether elements of social capital either increase or decrease homicide. The cross-national work that does is often characterized by small, homogeneous samples and the use of inappropriate statistical techniques. Replicating elements of Lederman et al.'s (Econ Dev Cult Change 50:509-539, 2002) original study but with wave IV World Values Survey data and negative binomial regression, we find weak support for the beneficial consequences of social capital on homicide. One dimension of social capital, however, does exhibit a significant negative association with homicide rates, net of other influences: social activism. We also fail to support the Durkheimian hypothesis that the negative effect of social capital on homicide is conditional on modernization. We explore the implications of the findings along with avenues for future research.

Religion and the Acceptability of White‐Collar Crime: A Cross‐National Analysis

“…Recent studies have provided support for the moral community hypothesis, finding that religious contexts do tend to amplify the negative effect of religion on crime and deviance and attitudes toward crime and deviance (Finke and Adamczyk 2008; Maimom and Kuhl 2008; Regnerus 2003; Scheepers, te Grotenhuis, and van der Slik 2002; Stack and Kposowa 2006; Wallace et al 2007). This hypothesis has also been extended to other outcome variables of interest such as criminal sentencing (Ulmer, Bader, and Gault 2008), substance abuse treatment (Richard, Bell, and Carlson 2000; Shields et al 2007), and religious participation (Hill 2009).…”

Cooperation without Culture? The Null Effect of Generalized Trust on Intentional Homicide: A Cross-National Panel Analysis, 1995–2009

“…The fixed- and random-effects estimates appear to simultaneously support and challenge prior work using OLS or 2SLS cross-sectional designs [11], [12], [16]. Since this is the case, I investigated classic interaction effects and conditional propositions.…”

“…However, unless the relation between culture and large-scale cooperation is investigated in concrete real-life settings, where one can account for context-specific structural factors, the ultimate impact of culture on social order is difficult to evaluate. Although previous studies have explored the relationship between culture and large-scale cooperation with diverse national and cross-national populations [11], [12], [13] and have documented the importance of some cultural elements [14], [15], [16], [17], reliable evidence on the extent to which variation in measures of culture, such as generalized trust, affects real-life measures of large-scale cooperation, such as intentional homicide, through time is altogether missing [18].…”

Examining the economic impact of transport complex economies

“…Nahapiet & Ghoshal (1998) defined social capital as assets that may be mobilized through a network. According to Robbins & Pettinicchio (2012), social capital is defined as the objective associations of a particular type among individuals that foster collective action. Barker (1990) viewed social capital as a resource that actors have derived from a specific social structure and then use to pursue their interests.…”

“…In examining the contribution of TCEs, it is important to examine performance outcome. The GDP of a country reflects actual economic performance (Rawski 2001), and therefore GDP is commonly used at the regional or national level to examine economic growth and performance (Robbins & Pettinicchio 2012). GDP per capital is a good indicator of economic performance (Chen et al 2005).…”