A tale of two towns: A comparative study exploring the possibilities and pitfalls of social capital among people seeking recovery from substance misuse

Background: Social capital has become an influential concept in debating and understanding the modern world. Within the drug and alcohol sector, the concept of ‘recovery capital’ has gained traction with researchers suggesting that people who have access to such capital are better placed to overcome their substance use-related problems than those who do not (Cloud and Granfield, 2008), leading to requests for interventions that focus on building social capital networks (Neale & Stevenson, 2015). While accepting that the concept of social capital has enormous potential for addressing the problems associated with drug use, this paper also considers its ‘dark side’. Methods: Data were drawn from semi-structured interviews with 180 participants including 135 people who use drugs and 45 people who formerly used drugs. Results: High levels of trust, acquired through the establishment of dense social networks, are required to initiate recovery. However, these ‘strong bonds’ may also lead to the emergence of what is perceived by others as an exclusive social network that limits membership to those who qualify and abide by the ‘rules’ of the recovery community, particularly around continuous abstinence. Conclusions: Depending on the nature of the networks and the types of links participants have into them being socially connected can both inhibit and encourage recovery. Therefore, the successful application of social capital within the drugs and alcohol field requires a consideration of not only the presence or absence of social connections but their nature, the value they produce, and the social contexts within which they are developed

Perceived economic self‑sufficiency: a countryand generation‑comparative approach

We thank Michael Camasso and Radha Jagannathan as well as Asimina Christoforou, Gerbert Kraaykamp, Fay Makantasi, Tiziana Nazio, Kyriakos Pierrakakis, Jacqueline O’Reilly and Jan van Deth for their contribution to the CUPESSE project (Seventh Framework Programme; Grant Agreement No. 61325). CUPESSE received additional funding from the Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES) and the Field of Focus 4 “Self-Regulation and Regulation: Individuals and Organisations” at Heidelberg University. We further acknowledge helpful comments on this article by two anonymous reviewers. Julian Rossello provided valuable research assistance.Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https ://doi.org/10.1057/ s4130 4-018-0186-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.Existing datasets provided by statistical agencies (e.g. Eurostat) show that the economic and financial crisis that unfolded in 2008 significantly impacted the lives and livelihoods of young people across Europe. Taking these official statistics as a starting point, the collaborative research project “Cultural Pathways to Economic Self-Sufficiency and Entrepreneurship in Europe” (CUPESSE) generated new survey data on the economic and social situation of young Europeans (18–35 years). The CUPESSE dataset allows for country-comparative assessments of young people’s perceptions about their socio-economic situation. Furthermore, the dataset includes a variety of indicators examining the socio-economic situation of both young adults and their parents. In this data article, we introduce the CUPESSE dataset to political and social scientists in an attempt to spark a debate on the measurements, patterns and mechanisms of intergenerational transmission of economic self-sufficiency as well as its political implications.CUPESSE project (Seventh Framework Programme; Grant Agreement No. 61325

On what citizens mean by feeling 'European' : perceptions of news, symbols and borderless-ness

What is ‘Europe’ for citizens? What do people mean when they say that they feel, or not, European? A growing amount of literature has been produced by political scientists and journalists alike to try and assess the absence or existence of a European identity, but it is very unclear what people tell us when answering our questions on their political identities. Multiple theories of political identities exist, imposing fairly rigid and untested (and, essentially, quantitatively untestable) assumptions on what they mean. No deductive technique, however, would allow us to let citizens explain to us the deeper signification of citizens’ answers to our questions on who they are and how they perceive their attachment to varying political communities. Therefore, this paper presents an analysis of a series of focus group discussions run in France, the UK, and the Netherlands with over ninety participants on what citizens believe to be ‘Europe’ and ‘Europeans’. They tell us how they believe the media inform them on Europe, and how they perceive the main symbols of the European Union. They explain what matters to them in terms of their direct experience of European integration, and finally, what a ‘European identity’ means to them and whether they think of themselves and of their peoples as European or not. We discover that citizens are relatively cynical with regards to the perceived bias of the media on the European question, derive impressionistic but somewhat surprising findings on the meaning they attribute to Europe through its symbols, with references to peace, cosmopolitanism and other ‘anti-identity’ values, and that ultimately, their predominant perception of European-ness relies, precisely, on the disappearance of internal EU borders. Finally, we can identify two main ‘ways’ for citizens to define a European identity, a predominantly ‘civic’ one, and the other, a predominantly ‘cultural’ one