Social capital: A rural perspective

Rural areas are often perceived to benefit from ‘stronger’ social capital than urban communities, and aggregate-level data often support this popular image. However, there is a shortage of in-depth accounts of how rural social capital operates and in particular the extent to which social capital is located in place. Headline statistics that define, quantify and measure social capital may gloss over underlying detail and intangible features. They also run the risk of over-simplifying the links between social capital and quality of life. The detail of the outcomes of social capital – both positive and negative - for different types of people are not well-understood and pockets of deprivation and patterns of exclusion may be disguised.

This project continues Defra’s programme of research designed to deepen understanding of rural life in England and the experiences and needs of rural residents. It will feed into Defra’s departmental strategic objective (DSO) for strong rural communities by contributing to the body of evidence relating to how these needs may be addressed through public policy and service delivery.

Using qualitative and quantitative tools, including an evidence review of the theoretical literature, and primary research based on Q methodology, the project aims to go beyond headline statistics relating to social capital and quality of life in rural areas.

Objectives
The key research questions were as follows:

1. How is social capital experienced in rural England:
   a) by different groups of rural residents?
   b) in different types of rural place?
2. What, if anything, distinguishes rural social capital from urban social capital?
3. If experiences of social capital are found to differ by person and place, what might help explain this difference?

Methodology
In order to address the research questions, the research covered three phases:

• Phase 1: evidence review
• Phase 2: fieldwork
• Phase 3: analysis and reporting

Phase 1: evidence review
The first phase, a literature and evidence review involving both desk-based work and consultation with experts, provided the theoretical and analytical framework for the project in which all subsequent phases were firmly grounded. Our experience shows that an iterative approach to evidence reviewing helps to strike the right balance between defining focused parameters and ensuring sufficient coverage. The main review therefore incorporated two initial 'waves', plus a third wave feeding in to the fieldwork design.

Wave 1: scoping sources and first tranche of review
Drawing from the theoretical and empirical evidence on social capital, this stage involved:

• Scoping the coverage and availability of sources through on and offline library database searches;
• Conducting an initial review of sources to test the validity of the research questions and review parameters; and
• Establishing a strategy for the second and main tranche of evidence review.

Wave 2: second tranche of review
This wave covered:

• In-depth reading and reviewing of sources to ensure that all bases were covered and to add focus and depth to the review;
• Analysis and interpretation of the evidence with a view to informing the primary fieldwork methodology and the evolving policy context; and
• A workshop with researchers, policy makers and practitioners to bring together their expertise and insight so as to add depth to the evidence review, gather feedback on the initial analysis and feed into further analysis and the fieldwork methodology.

Wave 3: selection of case study locations
This element covered the selection of eight case study locations, six in rural areas (three in rural towns and three in rural villages/ hamlets) and two in (sub)urban areas. The rural case study locations were chosen for their geographical and social-economic spread. Each was situated in a different Government Office Region and had varying levels of deprivation and affluence: Two were in the most deprived areas of England (based on Index of Multiple Deprivation rankings for local Lower Super Output Areas), two in the middle tier and two in the least deprived tier. The case study areas were also chosen to provide a good degree of understanding of themes common to the experience of many rural residents.

The urban case study locations were chosen on the basis that they could meaningfully be compared with the rural case study locations in terms of demographic and socio-economic structures.

Phase 2: fieldwork
This was an extensive piece of primary research employing Q methodology. Q uses both qualitative and quantitative tools to systematically explore subjective structures, attitudes and perspectives from the standpoint of the research participants. The method is designed to reveal both individual responses and patterns of shared understanding and as such was ideally suited to exploring differing experiences of social capital.

96 interviews were conducted across the eight case study locations. Through Q, these enabled the systematic exploration of the subjective elements of social capital and how this differs among different groups as well as the identification and comparison of key perspectives on social capital in rural and urban areas. The interviews also gave us a wealth of less structured data.

Phase 3: analysis and reporting
Detailed and thorough analysis has been conducted throughout the project and lead to a number of interim reports, workshops and presentations. Defra and other stakeholders have been involved throughout the process to ensure their wider experience and expertise has been brought to bear on the project.

Findings
The final report is due to be published shortly. Findings will be posted here, along with a link to download the report when it becomes available. In the meantime there is further information available on the Defra website.