Whose birthday is next?
The “first birthday method” was the simple and personal way that made the environment lighter as she walked into many a humble village home in the Central Province. But the research that social scientist Dr. Nishadi Somaratne was conducting was no light matter.
Striking up a conversation after this question, she was able to dig deep into their lives for answers to more sensitive questions.
For the level of “social capital” was what she was after, as she trudged from door-to-door totalling 460 homes in remote villages such as Handaganawa, Ambakotte, Aluthwatte, Udagama, Werapitiya, Sigiriya and Kirillagolla.
 |
| Nishadi Somaratne explains a point. |
Seeking evidence how social capital affects the rural populace’s well-being, as her thesis for her Ph.D from the Post Graduate Institute of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya, Dr. Somaratne devoted all her time from 2006 through to April 2009 for her research project.
“My research is quantitative and I believe it may be the first on social capital,” says Dr. Somaratne who did her research under the supervision of Dr. O.G. Dayaratne and Dr. H.V.A. Wickremasuriya.
“The sample was a mix of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims and also men and women,” she says explaining that her sample was selected on a random-basis.
What is social capital?
The simple explanation is how wealthy you are in terms of your social relationship – your total stock of social relationships.
Delving into the past, Dr. Somaratne says that on the evolutionary journey of humankind, there have been certain developments that have wrought irrevocable changes – one was industrialization. But even after the industrial revolution, people felt there was a lack in their lives. Modern human beings pursued materialism, which later changed to a concentration on the environment, but still there was something missing. With these developments came the terms “financial capital”, “physical capital”, “human capital”, “environmental capital” etc.
The search continued and finally the focus fell on human relationships, the Sunday Times understands. It was only then that it dawned on humankind that social relationships, which most took for granted, did matter.
“So this was deemed another ‘capital’ that contributes to the process of production or a factor of production and the importance of social relationships for health and goodwill began to be recognized,” she says.
As “social capital” has become an essential factor in development, it prompted Dr. Somaratne to check it out in the Sri Lankan context.
“Our society is a close-knit network of kinship where social relationships are valued. Such relationships are in our blood. It’s a culturally accepted thing,” she says. But, according to her, their implication on development has not been discussed. In rural settings people are cohesive. They belong to a network of family and kinsmen. They have strong social relations, more so than those in the urban areas. Did such social relationships have an impact on the rural folks’ well-being, is what she wanted to verify with well-being defined as the perceived level of satisfaction towards the economic and social standard enjoyed by them.
Using urban and rural population data of the Census and Statistics Department, Dr. Somaratne had selected Divisional Secretariat Divisions with more rural people. Thereafter, taking into consideration the official poverty line of 2002, which was Rs. 1,423 per person per month, as the fine line, she had picked out the areas with people with better (seven divisions) and poorer (seven divisions) levels of well-being.
Drawing out 42 villages randomly and a sample of 420 people, 10 from each village, she spent about 40 minutes in each home, she says, adding that as there is no other determinant for well-being she decided to use the poverty-line. The people were all over 18.
A detailed questionnaire was prepared to elicit the information required to ascertain the stock of social capital that people possessed, the Sunday Times understands.
The “total stock” was gauged on three categories:
- General social relationships
These are the stock of social relationships that a person is born to – parents, family, schoolmates, workplace colleagues etc. They are essential and inevitable but though the spread is broad they could in reality be shallow relationships. The questions posed to get this information included: How many members of your family are sincere to you? (To which the answers were eye-openers even with regard to parents….“Ammagen wedak ne” or “Thaththagen wedak ne”); How many relatives visit you during the Sinhala New Year or Deepavali? How many did you visit? How many pirith, pinkam, weddings did you attend last year?
These could be any close relationship between two siblings, two classmates. They are few, with a narrow spread but the bonds are deep and valued with a lot of trust and high reciprocity. Citing an example, Dr. Somaratne says that when there is a need for money, most people can’t turn to everyone to borrow it, only to someone with whom you have a special relationship. Even in sharing secrets these are the bonds that would matter. Here came the probing and sensitive posers as they were subjective conditions: How many people in your life can you tell a secret to? Do you think you have anybody who will not desert you during the worst misery in your life? If you are cornered by society or lose everything in a natural disaster who will be by your side to support you? (The answers were revealing – “only my husband”, “only my mother”) If you need a large sum of money, about Rs. 100,000 or more, how many will give it to you without any conditions?
- Relationships with associations
These form affiliations with old boys/girls groups in schools, grama sanwardene samithi, sports committees etc. They could be broad in choice but once again not creatre close bonds. Here they had to answer questions such as: How many associations are you a member of? How many shramadana campaigns have you participated in? Are you a member of a group beyond your village?
The findings in the rural environment amazed Dr. Somaratne. Although “completeness” or “fulness” came from having all three types of relationships, the strength of social capital and well-being was moderate.
However, stresses Dr. Somaratne, some who had just one relationship had a strong social capital. Referring to the inhibiting factors within a village, she explains that many families may not have close bonds within the villages itself due to class, caste issues but be part of a strong network with outsiders.
Pointing out the case of a wee mudalali (paddy businessman), she says he was not a member of any society in his village and did not have close links with his neighbours, but was part of a strong network of businessmen at the Manning Market.
There were several others too who though they didn’t have community or family relationships, had strong and special peer relationships, she said, adding that these “extreme cases” showed high levels of social capital. “This was despite ‘completeness’ coming from all three in general.”
What surprised this social scientist was that in the village set-up though social capital had a significant impact on people, it was only a moderate one, not weak or strong. It didn’t have an impact to the level expected. This was surprising at village level.
Her argument, therefore, is that villagers have a number of social relationships, but if they are of poor quality, no purpose is served. How do you explain a quality relationship?
A high level of income correlated with well-being as also education and social capital. These were strong links. “Social relationships do not have much impact on your well-being, if they don’t come with better education and better income,” she says. A quality relationship will include financial and material; moral; and human (education and health) resources. These three types of resources should be there in equal levels and the paucity of one can lower the total quality of a social relationship.
She cites the example of a person who is benign and generous but poor and as such cannot help a relative or friend who needs money. Then the capacity of the first person in this social relationship to contribute to the wellbeing of the other is less. Another case could be a person who is rich and educated but miserly, leading to a lower quality relationship.
According to Dr. Somaratne in the rural set-up, people are confined and diversity is not recognized, only similarity. “Villagers cannot spread their wings. They have to abide by traditional norms. Diversity is frowned on. This is the curse of our rural society,” she stresses.
Dispelling the myth that social relationships and thus wellbeing are strong in the villages, this social scientist urges that exposure is essential while appreciating diversity.
In development, this is what we must address, underlines Dr. Somaratne. The need is not to pump finances into rural institutions but to get villagers to look beyond their boundaries which act as inhibitory factors, discarding obsolete social values. |
E-mail