Sociation Today®
ISSN 1542-6300
The Official Journal of the
North Carolina Sociological
Association
A Peer-Reviewed
Refereed Web-Based
Publication
Fall/Winter 2016
Volume 14, Issue 2
|
The
Relationship Between Social
Capital
and the Quality of Life: A Case Study from Iran by Jahangir Jahangiri Shiraz University Saeed Moghadas Tehran University and Sadegh Panahinasab Tarbiat Modarres University Introduction and
Research Problem
Discussion of quality of life goes
back to Aristotle. He addressed
human happiness, and that what
happiness is. Aristotle considered
good life equivalent to happiness,
yet distinguished the difference of
this concept among different
individuals. Academic approach to
quality of life in 1920 entered a
new phase, namely when Pigu
addressed this issue in his book Economy
and Welfare. And after that,
the concept became the interest of
other scientists in humanities
fields, and an interdisciplinary
subject. In this regard, several
interpretations and definitions were
proposed on the meaning of quality
of life. Sel and Taleski
evaluated quality of life and
considered individual satisfaction
of his existing performance level,
compared to what he considers as
ideal or possible (Salamati, 2009).
The World Health Organization has
defined quality of life as the
individual's understanding of
his/her position in life in the
cultural context and value system in
which he/she lives, and of his/her
goals, expectations and standards.
So the concept of the quality of
life is quite individual and
cannot be observed by others and is
based on individuals' understanding
of various aspects of their lives
(Bonomi et al., 2000). This means
that is based on each person's view
according to his/her age, gender,
culture, education and social
environment (King and Hinds, 2003).
Quality of life today is the concern
of all governments and most
international organizations and
there is a general consensus among
researchers and policy makers.
The concept of quality of life is a new concept in social research. In mid-twentieth century, with economic, social and cultural development and scientific and technological progress, humans gradually demanded higher welfare and higher quality of life. For this reason, quality of life has been of great interest in twentieth century (Pasandideh, 2007). Therefore, this issue has been considered with other social indices such as social capital and its components. In general it can be said that quality of life is affected by time, place, social and personal values that could be examined in personal, subjective and objective aspects. In 1960s, when sociologists reacted against the dominance of economic indices, the concept of quality of life became important in social studies, but until then, all indices of quality of life were objective. Subjective indices for measuring quality of life were added in 1970s. Campbell et al. for the first time in 1976 considered mental and psychological indices of quality of life (Campbell et al., 1976). On one hand, regarding issues such as decrease of cooperation and integration between people, increase of self-oriented or negative individualism, globalization and rising people expectations and etc. quality of life, especially from its subjective aspect, has been highly regarded again in recent years. On the other hand, the concept of social capital in the last two and three decades has become very common and popular as a set of social resources and reserves (such as social trust, the feeling of empathy and cooperation between people, dedication...) that can enhance an individual's social relations. Putnam considers social capital as a set of concepts such as trust, norms and networks that causes creating optimized communication and participation of members of a community will provide their mutual benefits. In his opinion, mutual trust and communication of the members in the network is as a source that exists in community members' interactions (Putnam, 2001: 225). According to Putnam, groups and communities that are governed by the norms and follow them can overcome group work more efficiently. About the relationship between social capital and quality of life, it can be said that the elements of social capital by enhancing communication and access to resources can result in desirable outcomes, such as wealth, power, fame, physical health, mental health and life satisfaction. These factors also have a direct and positive effect on other related levels of quality of life. All proposed assumptions and definitions based on social capital index in the individual aspect are related to the quality and value of relationships between individuals and in the social aspect is the quality and value of relationships between groups, organizations and institutions. The quality of relationships is an important index for quality of life that apart from the individual aspect can be proposed in different environments and sets including community, neighborhood, work environment, education environment, family and other social institutions and organizations. So identifying the relationship between social capital and quality of life can provide an important part of required information on effective components on welfare for social welfare policy making in the community. Quality of life and its influencing factors are very important, because it can be achieved by creating the context for these factors, one of the most important of which is social capital. Many studies show that there is a relationship between quality of life and social capital (Ghaffari and Onagh, 2006). There is some research on these issues in Iran, but none of them address students as a learned, literate and stressful group. The present study will examine the relationship between social capital and quality of life of students in Tehran and Shiraz Universities and generally seeks to answer these questions: Is there a relationship between social capital and students' quality of life? Is there a relationship between the main aspects of social capital and students' quality of life? Literature Review
About social capital and quality of
life we can say that our sense of
well-being should be related to ties
we have with family, friends,
colleagues, neighbors, neighborhood
and macro-social system. Also many
studies show that there is a
relationship between quality of life
and variables such as stress, social
capital, self-esteem, ethnicity,
social support, etc. (Asadi Sadeghi
Azar et al., 2006; Pasandideh, 2007;
Ghaffari and Onagh, 2006; Garusi and
Taghavi, 2008; Noghani et al., 2009;
Zokaei and Roshanfekr, 2006;
Ghasemizadeh et al., 2010). Kim and
Kawachi in a study in different
States of America concluded that in
states with high or middle level of
social capital citizens have higher
levels of physical and mental
health, also income and social class
play an important role in
determining the level of social
capital and quality of life (Kim
& Kawachi, 2007). Many other
studies show that there is a
relationship between quality of life
and some aspects of social capital
such as social participation, social
network, social relations, social
trust and social norms (Farquhar,
1995; Duncan-Myers and Huebner,
2000; Khoshfar et al., 2014, Black,
Boshitsu and Gahabashi, 2005 quoted
from Noghani et al., 2009: 23).
Nilson et al. in a study examined
the relationship between social
capital and quality of life of the
elderly in Bangladesh villages
concluded that old age, poor
economic base of family and low
levels of social capital are of the
determinants of individuals' quality
of life (Nilson et al., 2006).
Other studies have investigated the relationship between poverty and social capital; the results indicate a strong negative correlation between poverty and social capital. In other words, the individuals' and groups' level of social capital are affected by poverty and deprivation, moreover, the two indices of lack of participation in decision-making as well as violence and strife play a highlighted role in incidence of poverty and development (Morris, 1988, Shaditalab and Hodjati Kermani, 2008; Zahedi et al., 2008). A study by Lochner et al. was conducted in Chicago to study ecological relationship between social capital and mortality rates in neighbors. Social capital was measured as a potentially effective component on health and the results indicated that there is a statistically negative and significant relationship between social capital and mortality (Quoted from Riahi, 2008). Nikbakht Nasrabadi et al. (2008) found that there is a negative correlation between general concern of students and their quality of life. This means that as anxiety increases, the quality of life decreases. Roslan et al. also addressed the relationship between social capital and quality of life and concluded that these variables are related to each other and have a positive effect on each other (Roslan et al., 2010). Social capital is considered as a solution for different social problems such as poverty, crime, lagged economy and low efficient government (Tavakoli et al., 2008: 145). Social capital is one of proposed factors that can explain why development efficiency is different in all governments and communities. For example, Putnam et al. (1993) argue that different results of development in various regions of Italy depend mainly on difference in the level of social capital of the regions. There are also a number of studies that have been done at the micro level and examined the relationship between social capital and household income. For example, Groutart's study on social capital and its relationship to family welfare and urban poverty in a variety of organizations and associations shows that social capital can have a positive effect on family welfare and livelihood (Quoted from Mousavi et al., 2012: 3). These studies show that social capital plays an important role in enhancing quality of life that is an important objective of development. So the indices of quality of life such as increased income and poverty reduction are to achieve development and ultimately a desirable life. In conclusion it can be concluded that shows that if social capital enhances, therefore the quality of life will improve. Although many studies have been carried out in this field, just a few have addressed the relationship between social capital and quality of life among students. Although in some of these studies the aspects of quality of life are referred, but none of them has analyzed these aspects so the present study has addressed this issue accurately and completely considering the imperfections. Theoretical
Framework
According to Mills (1978), quality
of life is usually described as
satisfaction and well-being
subjective assessment or a series of
social and economic outputs reached
by individuals or groups. Also some
believe that quality of life can be
examined like an objective or
subjective concept. In this
approach, quality of life focuses
not only on social and economic
outputs, but also on policies'
achievements and their effect on
people. When a person's quality of
life is considered in community
level, the concept is linked to
existing social and environmental
conditions such as economic
activity, climate conditions and
cultural institutions (Murray and
Frenk 2000). One of the key
variables that raise life level and
thus improve quality of life is
social capital. Social capital
refers to capitals such as social
trust, norms and networks (Putnam,
2001). Bourdieu considers social
capital as a form of "capital". In
his opinion, capital has three basic
forms: "economic" which can become
the currency and in the form of
property rights can be
institutionalized; "cultural" which
under some conditions becomes
economic capital and is
institutionalized in the form of
qualities of education; and "social"
which is made of social commitments
and under certain conditions can be
transformed into economic capital or
may be institutionalized in the form
of an aristocratic title (Bourdieu,
1986: 243). According to Bourdieu,
social capital in social relations
is tasks and rules or emerged
relationships between individuals
and an individual asset through
getting access to network resources.
Based on Lin's theory, the elements of social capital by enhancing and improving relationships and increasing the level of access to resources can result in wealth, power, fame, physical health, mental health and life satisfaction. And these are considered as the elements of quality of life. The quality of relationships in itself is an important index of quality of life that apart from individual level can be proposed in different sets including community, neighborhood, work environment, education environment, family and other social institutions and organizations (Lin, 1999). Lin discovered three layers of social constraints as concentric circles: bonding, bridging and linking. He claims that these layers define different intensities of relationships for an individual. Each person in bonding relationships spends his/her time and effort on family and close friends. In bridging relationships the individual has support of larger groups of relatives and neighbors and in linking relationships the individual has benefits of membership in voluntary institutions and groups (Lin et al., 2001). Fukuyama considers social capital in accordance with economic growth and development of countries, therefore his definition of social capital is a collective one. According to him, social capital can be simply defined as a certain set of informal norms or values of a group. Norms that generate social capital basically should have benefits such as honesty, commitment and mutual relationship (Fukuyama, 2000: 12). Kaplan and Lynch introduced social capital as the accumulation of capital and networks that create social integration, social commitment and thus a kind of self-esteem and satisfaction (Kaplan and Lynch, 2000). Putnam et al. (1993) considered social capital as components such as networks, norms and trust. Groutart emphasized social networks and ties that increase individuals' access to economic and social resources. Therefore, in this study, regarding theoretical discussions it can be said that if there is social capital, students increase their abilities in the form of norms and social ties that arise during social interactions and while gaining control of their lives, they have social supports which have been created in their communicative networks. In other words, social capital that exists among students can formally or informally decrease pressures of life by increasing social supports in the form of networks and provide them with a kind of life satisfaction and thus improve their quality of life. Figure 1 shows the relationship between independent variables and dependent variable in the form of research theoretical model. 
Methods
As explained below, this study was
done using questionaiares.
As mentioned by Zhang et al. by
virtue of self – report method the
respondents have private time and
atmosphere to remind their past
(Zhang et al., 2000). In this
study the quality of life in
Shiraz and Tehran was defined as
the dependent variable and
social capital as independent
variable. The sample included 546
students. The sampling method was
multiphase random. Data
analysis was done through
SPSS.
Research
Findings
Table 1 shows individuals'
relative distribution according to
some general characteristics of
the sample. As can be seen,
respondents' mean age was equal to
23.29 years and their education
years' mean was equal to 16.8
classes.
Table
1: Relative
Distribution
of respondents
according to demographic,
economic and social variable
60.7% of respondents are male and
39.3% are female. 78.5% of them
are single, 20.9% are married and
0.6% of them are divorced. 73.2
percent of respondents have
announced their social class as
average, 12.7 percent as high and
14.1 percent as very high. 60% of
respondents have mentioned their
family income less than one
million tomans, 29.9 percent
between 1 and 2 million tomans and
10.1 percent more than two million
tomans.
To test research hypotheses' two techniques of correlation coefficient and means comparison were used. Table 2 shows Pearson correlation coefficient between interval independent variables and quality of life aspects. Obtained results indicate that there is a relationship at least at 95% level between independent variables and quality of life and its aspects. Meanwhile, the relationship of informal charity participation variable was not significant in the four aspects of quality of life. Table 2: The
correlation between independent
variables and quality of life aspect
Table (3) shows
mean
difference of quality of
life according to
nominal
variables (gender,
marital status and social class).
Existing statistics
for social class also show that
average score of quality of life for
high class
individuals is 82.13, for middle
class is 78.99 and for lower class
is 50.84. In other words, students
who have high class identity have
higher quality of life than middle
and low class students. This score
in each category is significant
based on F test with the amount of
101.19 at 99%. Also, no significant
difference was observed in quality
of life based on gender. These
equations for each of the four
aspects of quality of life (physical
health, life environment, social
relationships and mental well-being)
were also observed. The only thing
to remember is that gender was
significant only in the physical
health aspect, namely mean score of
females' physical health (25.22) is
higher than males' (23.80) and
this difference based on
T-test is significant at 99%
confidence level.
In the present study, stepwise multivariate regression was used. Based on this method, different variables entered regression equation in order of their importance in explaining the dependent variable. Table (4) shows results of multivariate analysis for quality of life and its aspects. Analysis results for quality of life show that five variables of trust, institutional trust, age, formal participation and awareness remained in the model and other variables were out of the equation. The five variables remained in the model could explain and describe 35.6% of quality of life variance. For physical health, analysis results show that six variables of public trust, institutional trust, formal participation, age, gender and household income totally could explain 28.6% changes of the dependent variable. Table 4:
Regression
coefficients: The effect of
independent variables on quality of life
and its
aspects
For the second aspect of quality of
life, namely environmental quality
of life, six variables of public
trust, institutional trust, age,
awareness, formal participation and
household income totally could
explain 27.2% of the variance of
dependent variable (R²=27.2). For
the third aspect, namely social
relations, five variables of public
trust, formal participation,
institutional trust, age and social
class totally could explain 29.9% of
its changes (R²=29.9). Meanwhile,
social class variable entered
regression equation as a dummy
variable. For mental well-being, the
fourth aspect of quality of life,
public trust, institutional trust,
age and formal participation totally
could explain 33.3% of its variance
(R²=33.3).
Also, B coefficients for quality of life show that in the first stage for each unit increase in public trust 2.11 is added to individuals' quality of life. In the second stage, for every unit increase in institutional trust 0.77 is subtracted from individuals' quality of life score. In the third stage for each unit increase in age 0.69 is added to individuals' quality of life score. In the fourth stage for every unit increase in formal participation 2.16 is added to individuals' quality of life score. In the fifth stage for each unit increase in awareness 1.07 is added to quality of life score. For physical health B coefficients show that in the first stage for every unit increase in public trust 0.51 is added to individuals' physical health score. In the second stage, for every one unit increase in institutional trust 0.19 is subtracted from individuals' physical health score. In the third stage, for every one unit increase in formal participation 0.516 is added to individuals' physical health score. In the fourth stage for every one unit increase in age 0.151 is added to individuals' physical health score. In the fifth stage for every one unit increase in household income 0.258 is added to physical health score. B coefficients for environmental quality of life show that in the first stage for every one unit increase in public trust 0.562 is added to individuals' physical health score. In the second stage, for every one unit increase in institutional trust 0.207 is subtracted from individuals' quality of life environment score. In the third stage, for every one unit increase in age 0.217 is added to individuals' quality of life environment score. In the fourth stage for every one unit increase in awareness 0.615 is added to individuals' quality of life environment score. In the fifth stage for every one unit increase in formal participation 0.505 is added to quality of life environment score. In the sixth stage for every one unit increase in household income 0.285 is added to environmental quality of life score. B coefficients for quality of social relationships show that in the first stage by every unit increase in public trust 0.278 is added to individuals' social relations score. In the second stage, by every one unit increase in formal participation 0.513 is added to individuals' social relations score. In the third stage by every unit increase in institutional trust 0.093 is added to individuals' social relations score. In the fourth stage for every unit increase in age 0.126 is added to individuals' social relations score. In the fifth stage for every unit increase in social class 0.322 is added to individuals' social relations score. B coefficients for mental well-being show that in first stage for every one unit increase in public trust .661 is added to individuals' mental well-being score. In the second stage, for every one score increase in institutional trust 0.223 is subtracted from individuals' mental well-being score. In the third step, for every one unit increase in age 0.269 is added to individuals' mental well-being score. In the fourth step, for every one unit increase in formal participation 0.505 is added to individuals' mental well-being score. Conclusions
The problem that was addressed in
this study was the relationship
between social capital and quality
of life. Generally the levels of
formal participation among studied
subjects was very low. This finding
is consistent with the study of
Garusi and Taghavi on women in
Kerman, which showed in this city
the participation of women is very
low (Garusi and Taghavi, 2008).
Public trust level is moderate and
institutional trust level is low.
The levels of public trust and
institutional trust are low, and
that is a very important matter.
Informal charity participation does
not have a significant relationship
with quality of life. Males and
females had a significant difference
only in physical health aspect so
that females were in better physical
health than males. Married men and
women in comparison to others were
in better situation in terms of
quality of life in all four aspects.
Also, those who had high class
identity were in better situation in
all quality of life aspects in
comparison to those in middle and
low classes. These findings are
consistent with the results of Kim
and Kazak study. The results of this
study also show that by aging
quality of life is increased. One of
the main variables that effects
quality of life and its aspects was
household income. This finding is
also consistent with the study of
Nilsson et al., 2006; Morris, 1988;
and Shaditalab and Hodjati Kermani,
2008. In regression analysis,
variables such as public trust,
institutional trust, age, formal
participation and awareness had a
significant effect on quality of
life. This finding is consistent
with previous studies (Kim and
Kawachi, 2007; Chen et al., 2006;
Garusi and Taghavi, 2008; Ghaffari
and Onagh, 2006; Ruslan et al.,
2010). In regression analysis of
quality of life aspects (physical
health, environmental quality of
life, social relationships and
mental well-being), public trust was
most effective.
According to some experts' opinions, low levels of social capital or any of its aspects can decrease the success of development programs and social welfare (Putnam, 2001; Stones, 1991). In this study it was observed that by increasing social capital and its aspects, quality of life, which is one of the basic issues of sustainable development and one of new goals of governments for social welfare, will be increased. Thus, the findings of this study confirm previous theories and studies on the relationship between social capital and aspects of quality of life. References
Asadi Sadeghi Azar, I., Vasudeva, P. and Abdollahi, A. (2006). "Relationship between Quality of Life, Hardiness, Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem amongst Employed and Unemployed Married Women in Zabol." Journal of Psychiatry, 1(1), 104-111. Bonomi A.E, Patrick D.L, Bushnell D.M. and Martin M. (2000) "Validation of Unites States Version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL) Instrument." Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 53 (1), 19-23. Bourdieu, P. (1986). "The forms of Capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, New York: Greenwood, pp. 241-258. Campbell, A., Converse, E. P. and Rodgers, L. W. (1976). The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations and Satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Duncan-Myers, A.M & Huebner, R.A. (2000). "Relationship between Choice and Quality of Life among Residents in Long Term Care Facilities." American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54(5): 504-508. Farquhar, M. (1995). "Elderly Peoples' Definitions of Quality of Life." Social Science and Medicine. 41 (10), 1439-46. Fukuyama, F. (2000). "Social Capital and Civil Society." IMF Working Paper: IMF Institute. Garusi, S. & Taghavi, A. (2008). "Social Capital and Quality of Life in Kerman." Journal of Social Welfare, 8 (30-31), 61-82. Ghasemizadeh, A., Berenjian Tabrizi, H., Abedi, M., Barzideh, O. (2010). "Comparative Study of the Relationship between Quality Of Life and Self-Esteem: Locus of Control, Stress, Social Capital and Fars Martyrs' Children." New Approaches in Educational Management Journal. 4, 107-114. Khoshfar, G, Khajeh Shokouhi A., Karami S., Bargahi R. (2014). "Examining the Relationship between Social Capital and Quality of Life in Urban Areas, Case Study: Gorgan Urban Areas." Geographic Logistics of Space: Scientific- Research Journal of Golestan University. 3 (9), 151-179. Kim, D. & Kawachi, I. (2007). "U.S. State Level Social Capital and Health Related Quality of Life," AEP, 17 (4), 258–269. King C. R. and Hinds P. S. (2003). Quality of Life from Nursing and Patients' Perspectives: Theory, Research, Practice. UK: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Lin, N. (1999). "Building a Network Theory of Social Capital." Connections, 22(1), 28-51. Lin, N., Cook K. S., Burt R. S. (2001). Social Capital: Theory and Research. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Lynch, J. & Kaplan, G. (2000). "Socioeconomic Position." In L. F. Berkman & I. Kawachi (Eds), Social Epidemiology (pp. 13-35). New York: Oxford University Press. Mills, T. (1978). Quality of work life: What's in a name?. Canada: General Motors Corp. Morris, D. (1988). Measuring the Conditions of the World's Poor: The Physical Quality of Life Index. New York: Pergamon Press. Mousavi, M., Ghanbari, H., Ismaeilzadeh, Kh. (2012). "Spatial Analysis of the Relationship between Social Capital and Sustainable Development in Urban Cities of West Azerbaijan." Journal of Geography and Development, 27, 1-18. Murray C, Frenk J. (2000). "A Framework for Assessing the Performance of Health Systems." Bull World Health Organ. 78(6): 717–731. Narayan, D. & Pritchett, L. (1999)." Cents and Sociability: Household Income and Social Capital in Rural Tanzania." Economic Development and Culture Change 47(4), 871-897. Nikbakht Nasrabadi, A., Mazloum, R., Nesari, M., Goudarzi, F. (2008). "The Relationship between Areas of Concern and Quality of Life of Students." Monitoring Quarterly, 8 (1), 85-92. Noghani, M., Asgharpour A., Kermani, M., Safa S. (2009). "Citizens' Quality of Life and Its Relation to Social Capital in Mashhad." Social Sciences of Journal, Faculty of Literature and Humanities. University of Mashhad, 5 (1), 111-140. Ghaffari, A., & Onagh Naz, M. (2006). "Social Capital and Quality of Life: A Case Study of Gonbad-e- Kavos." Journal of Social Studies 1 (1), 159-199. Pacion, M. (2003). "Urban Environmental Quality and Human Well-being: A social Geographical Perspective." Landscape Urban Planning, 65 (1-2), 19-30. Pasandideh, Yalda (2007). Examining the Relationship between Social Economic Capital and Quality of Life of the Elderly. MA Thesis, University of Shiraz. Peiman Salamati (2009). "What is Quality of Life?" The Journal of Sepid, 11 (696), www.salamatiran.com.NSite.FullStory.?Id=26617&type=3 Putnam, R. (2001). "Democracy and Civic Traditions." Translated by Mohammad Taghi Delforouz, Tehran: Islam Newspaper Publishing. [In Persain] Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., Nanetti, R.Y. & King, M. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Rezvani, M. R., Motakian A. A., Mansourian H. & Satari M. H. (2009). "Development and Evaluation of Urban Quality of Life Indices (Case Study: Nurabad City, Lorestan Province)." Journal of Urban and Regional Studies and Research, 1 (2), 87- 110. Riahi, M. I. (2008). "Social Capital and Health: The Description of their Relationship and Causal Explanation of Effective Mechanisms." Journal of Social Development 3 (1), 50- 67. Roslan, A., Russayani, I., Norazam. A. (2010). "The Relationship between Social Capital and Quality of Life among Rural Households in Terengganu, Malaysia." International Journal of Sustainable Development. 1 (5), 99-106. Shaditalab, J. & Hodjati Kermani, F. (2008). "Poverty and Social Capital in Rural Community." Journal of Social Welfare. 7 (28), 35-56. Schmitt, R.B. (2003). "Considering Social Capital in Quality of Life Assessment: Concept and Measurement." Social Indictors' Research. 58 (1-3), 403-428. Stones, Rob (2000). Key Sociological Thinkers. Translated by Mehrdad Mirdamadi, Tehran: Markaz Publications. Tavakoli, M. & Tajbakhsh, K. (2008). "Analysis of Social Capital in Rural and Urban Areas Boundary of Sistan." Journal of Rural Development, 11 (2), 143-162. Yusuf, S.A, (2008). "Social Capital and Household Welfare in Kwara State, Nigeria, Journal of Human Ecology" 23 (3), 219-229. Zahedi, M. J., Maleki, A., Heydari, A. (2008). "Poverty and Social Capital." Scientific- research Journal of Social Welfare. 7 (28), 79-106. Zokaei, Mohammad Saeed and Roshanfekr, Payam (2006). "The Relationship between Social Capital and Quality Of Life in Urban Neighborhoods." Social Science Quarterly 32, 1-38.
© 2017 Sociation Today
Return to
Home Page to Read More Articles Sociation Today is optimized
for the Firefox Browser
Editorial Board: Editor: George H. Conklin, North Carolina Central University Emeritus Robert Wortham, Associate Editor, North Carolina Central University Board: Rebecca Adams, UNC-Greensboro Bob Davis, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University Catherine Harris, Wake Forest University Ella Keller, Fayetteville State University Ken Land, Duke University Steve McNamee, UNC-Wilmington Miles Simpson, North Carolina Central University William Smith, N.C. State University |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||