Download Social Cohesion: Identification of Parameters Measurement

Merit Research Journal of Education and Review (ISSN: 2350-2282) Vol. 3(1) pp. 090-092, January, 2015
Available online http://www.meritresearchjournals.org/er/index.htm
Copyright © 2015 Merit Research Journals
Review
Social Cohesion: Identification of Parameters
Measurement
Houda Lahmar
Abstract
Laboratory of Management
Research, Center of Doctoral
Studies on Law and Economy,
University Mohamed V-, Rabat,
Morocco
E-mail: [email protected]
Social cohesion has a very strong interest in the stability of a country
because it determines a (dynamic) equilibrium between the components of
society and key incisive sense of justice and equality among the population
(values of solidarity, equity, non-discrimination). Social cohesion is not a
concept that has for purpose to be used in the speech relating to public
policy, much more this concept responds to well-defined parameters, I
would say within the economy, sociology as social structure requires:
Economic and statistical data which stabilize and sociological data that can
regulate the dynamism of vertical and horizontal flow
Keywords: Classes, Public policies, social cohesion, society, structure
INTRODUCTION
Trying to define social cohesion
The term “social cohesion” means the state of a society,
group or organization where solidarity is strong and
intense social ties. The term “social cohesion” was used
for the first time in 1893 by the sociologist Émile
Durkheim ((1858-1917) in his book “In the division of
labor” to describe the functioning of a society where
solidarity between individuals and the collective
conscience occur:
“We are thus led to recognize a new reason why the
division of labor a source of social cohesion. It not only
makes solidarity individuals, as we have said so far,
because it limits the activity each, but also because it
increases the it increases the unity of the body, simply
because it increases its life. At least in the normal state, it
does not produce any of these effects without the other. “
Social cohesion promotes the integration of people,
their commitment to the group and their participation in
social life. Members share a common set of values and
rules of conduct that are accepted by everyone.
However, the existence of social conflict does not
necessarily mean lack of social cohesion, but an increase
in intra classes; Example of conflict between worker and
entrepreneur, here social cohesion will increase in the
inner of each of these classes.
There is another definition of the Council of Europe:
“Social cohesion is the capacity of a society to ensure the
well-being of all its members, minimizing disparities and
avoiding marginalization.”
The paradigm shift in economic and social policies
inspired by neoliberalism has caused serious social and
political tensions (increasing poverty, deteriorating health
status of the population) and a loss of confidence in
public institutions. An accent more pronounced on market
forces and the classical liberal ideology helped fuel a
broad debate among those who fear the political costs,
social and economic costs involved letting aside social
cohesion. They engage in a reassessment of institutional
responsibilities of key sets – Public, private and third
sectors – liberal democracies modern.
Social cohesion has not become a subject of great
debate for the first time during the last decade of the
twentieth century. The concept of social cohesion was
previously defined as one of three theoretical traditions
concerned with the question of social order. Sociologists
and political scientists as Emile Durkheim in France in the
nineteenth century and, later, the American Talcott
Parsons in the 40 and 50 are concerned with the
question of social cohesion. They then underwent
competition, as they still do today, classical liberals and
democratic theorists from schools of social democracy,
Lahmar 091
PYRAMID OF SOCIAL
Pyramidal Thickness
UPPER CLASSES
COHESION
eCCLASS
Minimum GAP and minimum
area of non osmosis = Low Risk
of lack of Social Cohesion
Middle
classes/
HAUTE
Reduced
Thickness
Middle GAP and reduced area
of non osmosis = Risk of lack of
social cohesion (middle)
EXTENSION
Most Thickness
MIDDLE CLASSES
MOST EXTENSION
Small
Thickness
Area of
non
osmosis
Maximum GAP and
maximale and High area
of non osmosis = High
Risk of lack of social
cohesion
Zone d’osmose
Area of
non
osmosis
Low social classes
Extension
Figure 1. Geometric mapping of the social structure involving social mobility movements between different social
classes.Gap: disparity between two different social classes. Thickness: geometric dimension to represent demographic
importance.
Christian democracy and positive liberalism. This short
analysis simply to remind that all the theoretical
models do not consider social cohesion - defined as
shared values and a sense of belonging to the
community, as the cornerstone of the social order. Other
traditions emphasize other mechanisms, focusing on
institutional processes and conflicting interests rather
than values.
Characteristics of social cohesion
Generally and always according to Durkheim, social
cohesion develops on the basis of dynamic link
contractual nature, such as:
• Merchants Links
• Policies Links
• Cultural Links
092 Merit Res. J. Edu. Rev.
It is true that the current situation tends to stratify
increasingly modern society by developing several
minors to links within the same class.
The society is a vibrant social structure, having a more
or less acute pyramidal form; it evolves starting from its
two main components: the individual and social class; it
requires a harmonization that can guarantee a balance
between individuals and the various classes where the
individual is inserted.
Social cohesion has parameters defined as follows:
• Harmonization of wage differentials;
• Harmonization of intra-class cohesion;
• Positive osmosis (up) inter-classes;
• Reductions of segment mismatch (area including the
persons excluded from osmosis to the highest class).
(Figure 1)
Determinants of social cohesion
The main element of response lies in a psychological
factor common to any individual: the possibility (or the
hope and expectation) that each member belonging to a
level of a class has to:
- Move to a higher level within the same class that he
belongs (mobility intra-class);
- Move to a higher /lower class (mobility inter-class).
Mobility has a vertical movement upward (positive) and a
vertical
movement
downward
(negative).
The
harmonization of these ascending and descending flows
demonstrates the ability of a social system to ensure
osmosis upward (positive) to each member belonging to
various levels that make up a class.
To summarize, what defines social cohesion is the
capacity of a social system to:
• Maintain the absence of rigid / absolute borders
between intra-classes and inter-classes;
• Ensure to each "actor" of the society, the opportunity
to “climb” the social ladder and thus fit into the positive
osmosis.
Social cohesion requires the harmonization of wages,
rights, privileges and hopes among members of the same
class level, between levels of the same class (intraclass); and between different social classes (inter-class).
CONCLUSION
They do not exist “exportable” models of society
that could serve as paradigms. However, the success or
failure of certain policies can teach us valuable useful
lessons to develop our own models. They also prevent us
from falling into errors committed in the past.
Beyond being a mean or a trendy concept, social
cohesion is a guiding principle of public policy. The
expected result is the creation of a “social fabric” and
structuring of different groups and communities within a
country. It promotes the consolidation of democratic
institutions and the implementation of sustainable public
policies that provide citizens opportunities; ensure their
protection and allow them to develop their capacities. To
finish, social cohesion aims to strengthen institutions and
policies that can improve the social well-being and living
conditions.
REFERENCES
Berger P (éd.) (1998). The Limits of Social Cohesion: Conflict and
Mediation in Pluralist Societies. A Report of the Bertelsmann
Foundation to the Club of Rome, Westview, Boulder (Col.).
Bhalla, Ajit et Frédéric Lapeyre (1997). «Social Exclusion: Towards an
Analytical and Operational Framework », Development and Change,
vol. 28, p. 413-433.
Comité européen pour la cohésion sociale (2004). Une nouvelle
stratégie de cohésion sociale, 28 p , http:// www coe
int/t/dg3/socialpolicies/socialcohesiondev/
source/RevisedStrategy_fr pdf.
Conseil de l’europe (2004). Stratégie de cohésion sociale révisée,
Strasbourg.
Conseil de l’europe (2005). Elaboration concertée des indicateurs de la
cohésion sociale – Guide méthodologique, ed Les éditions du
Conseil de l’europe, Strasbourg.
Donzelot J et al (2007). Cohésion sociale à l’ère de la mondialisation,
Conseil de l’emploi des revenus et de la cohésion sociale, Dossier
n° 3 du CERC.
Durkheim E (1893). De la division du travail social, réédition, Paris,
PUF, 1973.
Fitoussi J -P, Sen a et Stiglitz J, Rapport de la commission sur la
mesure des performances économiques et du progrès social, www
stiglitz- sen-fitoussi fr.
Gomber T et al. (2009). Fondements de la démocratie sociale, édition,
allemagne, Fondation Friedrich Ebert.
Jonson J (novembre 1998). les Contours de la cohésion sociale : l’état
de la recherche au Canada, Réseaux canadiens de recherche en
politiques publiques, Renouf Publishing Co Ltd Ottawa (Ontario).
Mukerjee P, Ray SL (2006) Levels and Patterns of Social Cohesion and
Its Relationship with development in India : A Woman’s Perspective
Approach, Centre for the Study of Regional Development, School of
Social Siences, Jawaharlal nehru University, New Delhi.
Putnam R (1993). « Making Democracy Work : Civic Traditions in
Modern Italy», Kennedy School of Government, Taubman 370,
Cambridge.