IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cjrecs/v4y2010i1p63-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social networking and inequality: the role of clustered networks

Author

Listed:
  • Emanuela D'Angelo
  • Marco Lilla

Abstract

The paper aims to analyse how income inequality affects social networking in 14 European countries. By using the European Community Household Panel, we introduce new evidence to test the network-inequality nexus and construct inequality indexes directly from the microdata as well their decomposition. We explore how total income inequality is related to three specific levels of social networking; then, we introduce the 'clustered network' definition, decomposing total income inequality based on education level. The key idea is that higher income inequality among differently educated individuals (between inequality) boosts social networks while higher income inequality among individuals with similar education (within inequality) halts social networking. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Emanuela D'Angelo & Marco Lilla, 2010. "Social networking and inequality: the role of clustered networks," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 4(1), pages 63-77.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cjrecs:v:4:y:2010:i:1:p:63-77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cjres/rsq034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Garcia Alvarez-Coque, Jose-Maria & Lopez-Garcia Usach, T. & Sanchez Garcia, M., 2012. "Territory and innovation behaviour in agri-food firms: does rurality matter?," 126th Seminar, June 27-29, 2012, Capri, Italy 126030, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cjrecs:v:4:y:2010:i:1:p:63-77. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cjres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.