174
Overall, individuals may put an unequal emphasis on bonding and
bridging social capital in the three national contexts that we considered,
as each of them belongs to a distinct welfare state and benefits from dis-
tinct levels of wealth and education. Table 6.2 provides descriptive statis-
tics about bonding and bridging social capital in Switzerland, Portugal,
and Lithuania.
Social capital varies significantly across the three national contexts. On
average, individuals in Portugal have larger personal networks, with a
lower density of interactions than individuals living in Switzerland or
Lithuania. On the other hand, there is much less centralisation of sup-
port and interactions in Portugal than in either Switzerland or Lithuania.
Personal networks in the Swiss context are characterised by a rather aver-
age density of interactions and emotional support, but it has the highest
centralisation of personal networks of the three countries. Individuals
residing in Lithuania have smaller networks, with greater density of inter-
actions compared with the two other contexts, but only average density
of emotional support. The extent of centralisation of personal networks
in Lithuania is similar to that of personal networks in Switzerland.
These differences across the three countries meet some of our expecta-
tions. Bonding and bridging social capitals are not evenly distributed:
individuals in Switzerland feature bridging social capital more often than
individuals in Portugal and Lithuania. Portugal and Lithuania have
bonding social capital, but this is expressed in distinct relationships. In
Portugal, the density of interactions is weak, but the density of support is
strong, whereas Lithuania shows the reverse trend, as its density of inter-
actions is strong and its density of support is rather weak. In Switzerland,
Table 6.2 Indicators of social capital, by country. Average scores
Portugal Switzerland Lithuania Total F-test
Size 4.35 3.74 3.44 3.86 45.55
Interaction
Density 0.63 0.71 0.82 0.72 157.75
Centralisation 0.00 0.21 0.17 0.12 180.74
Emotional support
Density 0.72 0.59 0.62 0.65 49.87
Centralisation 0.03 0.26 0.20 0.15 212.54
Note: p < 0.05; p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
E.D. Widmer et al.