The response of two BC sawmill communities to the recession of the early 1980s : a newspaper analysis of social capital in the context of economic downturn
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses 6 identified dimensions of social capital in Canada to describe and characterize the response of two resource-dependent sawmill communities, Nanaimo and Powell River, British Columbia, during a period of severe economic downturn (1981-1983), using publicly available information found in community newspapers. Social capital is commonly conceptualized as a collective property of social relationships but is most commonly measured as an aggregation of individual survey responses. This study explores whether and how aggregated individual measures of social capital may be manifested in a collective context. A factor analysis of responses to the Equality, Security, Community (ESC) Survey, a representative survey of Canadian adults designed to investigate civil society and the formation of social capital, identified 6 dimensions of social capital in Canada (1). Five of the six dimensions of social capital are composites of cognitive individual measures of social capital, the sixth is a structural measure of community participation. A ’collective’ operational definition was developed for each of the dimensions prior to analyzing the newspaper data. Results show that a structural measure of social capital, namely ’community participation’, was substantially manifested in the newspaper coverage. The two dimensions related to trust - ’government trust’ and ’social trust’ - were not. One dimension, ’economic belief, was manifested in the newspapers of one town, but not the other. Some elements of the dimensions pertaining to perceptions of ’institutional performance’ and to values about ’solidarity’ were manifested in each town. The newspaper coverage on the community’s response was different in each of the two towns. The economic and resulting social structures in the two towns were quite different, as was the degree of relative geographic isolation, and these differences likely affected the nature of the social relationships, which would partly account for the different character of the community response in each town. If social capital is conceptualized as a collective property, a resource that is embedded in relationships that are features of the social structures of society, these results seem to suggest that economic base, degree of isolation, population size and composition and social hierarchy all matter in terms of social capital.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".