IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i12p7448-d841628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Social Support as an Argument for the Sustainable Construction of the European Community Space

Author

Listed:
  • Mihai Marian

    (Psychology Department, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

  • Dragos Darabaneanu

    (Department of Sociology and Social Work, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

  • Florentina Chirodea

    (Department of International Relations and European Studies, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

  • Constantin Toca

    (Department of International Relations and European Studies, University of Oradea, 410087 Oradea, Romania)

Abstract

Cohesion policy is a constant and central area of interest across the European Union. The development and success of European society depends on the social and economic cohesion at the level of all member states. Starting from this assumption, our study will focus on the interdependence between social cohesion and social support, the latter being interpreted and analysed as a means whereby social cohesion may be achieved. Thus, understanding the manifestations of community cohesion at the level of the European communities is an essential element in this investigation, while its main purpose is to build an explanatory model for interpreting social support. Based on such a framework, social cohesion may be analysed and understood. The following measurement scales will be applied to the analysis of social support: the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Survey of Recent Life Experiences, and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. The source of the information is a non-random sample of 1364 respondents. Data processing is based on the implementation of structural equation modelling (SEM) in order to explore the key factors that influence the perception of social support. As mentioned previously, we plan to build an explanatory model that links the perception of social support with life satisfaction and the disturbing factors that are the outcome of life experiences. A set of comparisons is also made using the independent t test and one-way ANOVA. The perception of social support is interpreted from the perspective of the occupational situation, the age category, the educational level and the marital status of respondents. The variables included in the study generally satisfied the goodness of fit indexes in accordance with the recommendations of the literature on SEM models. The conclusions of the study show that social support is at the core of community integration and one of the determinant elements of social cohesion. Everyday life events condition the perception of social support. In turn, the perception of social support acts on life satisfaction. It has been observed that a higher perception of social support may be associated with greater cohesion at the level of communities and also with a more stable social environment. We have identified a determining relationship between the perceived social support and the degree of social cohesion.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihai Marian & Dragos Darabaneanu & Florentina Chirodea & Constantin Toca, 2022. "Analysis of Social Support as an Argument for the Sustainable Construction of the European Community Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:7448-:d:841628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7448/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7448/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Chan & Ho-Pong To & Elaine Chan, 2006. "Reconsidering Social Cohesion: Developing a Definition and Analytical Framework for Empirical Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 273-302, January.
    2. Carrasco, Maria A. & Bilal, Usama, 2016. "A sign of the times: To have or to be? Social capital or social cohesion?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 127-131.
    3. Ying-Hua Huang & Chen-Yu Sung & Wei Tong Chen & Shu-Shun Liu, 2021. "Relationships between Social Support, Social Status Perception, Social Identity, Work Stress, and Safety Behavior of Construction Site Management Personnel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Diana-Teodora Trip & Ramona Simut & Daniel Badulescu, 2023. "Do Size and Ownership Determine the Willingness for Sustainable Innovations in Spa and Health Tourism? A Case Study on Baile Felix Spa Resort, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-17, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Woo Jin Lee & Inho Hwang, 2021. "Sustainable Information Security Behavior Management: An Empirical Approach for the Causes of Employees’ Voice Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Ghassan Baliki & Tilman Brück & Neil T. N. Ferguson & Sindu Workneh Kebede, 2022. "Fragility exposure index: Concepts, measurement, and application," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 639-660, May.
    3. Satish Kumar & Filomena Maggino & Raj V. Mahto & Riya Sureka & Leonardo Salvatore Alaimo & Weng Marc Lim, 2022. "Social Indicators Research: A Retrospective Using Bibliometric Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 413-448, July.
    4. Snower, Dennis J., 2019. "Toward global paradigm change: Beyond the crisis of the liberal world order," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-19.
    5. Clément Fontan & François Claveau & Peter Dietsch, 2016. "Central banking and inequalities," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 15(4), pages 319-357, November.
    6. Anna Jasińska-Biliczak, 2022. "Smart-City Citizen Engagement: The Answer to Energy Savings in an Economic Crisis?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-15, November.
    7. Hani Anouti & Antea Enna, 2023. "Social Instability in Fragile State Context: Exploring the Dynamics Between Syrian Refugees and the Lebanese Host Community in Lebanon," Contemporary Review of the Middle East, , vol. 10(4), pages 364-385, December.
    8. Parhi, Mamata & Diebolt, Claude & Mishra, Tapas & Gupta, Prashant, 2013. "Convergence dynamics of output: Do stochastic shocks and social polarization matter?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 42-51.
    9. Peer Smets & Ton Salman, 2008. "Countering Urban Segregation: Theoretical and Policy Innovations from around the Globe," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(7), pages 1307-1332, June.
    10. Sonia Stefanizzi & Valeria Verdolini, 2019. "Bordered communities: the perception of insecurity in five European cities," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 1165-1186, May.
    11. Dennis Puorideme, 2023. "An Ethnographic-Discourse Analysis of the Socio-political Effects of Interaction Between Cash Transfer Programme Authorities, Caregivers and Non-beneficiaries," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(3), pages 483-519, June.
    12. repec:gdk:wpaper:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. SARRACINO Francesco, 2011. "Income missing values imputation: EVS 1999 and 2008," LISER Working Paper Series 2011-05, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    14. Francesco Burchi & Armin von Schiller & Christoph Strupat, 2020. "Social protection and revenue collection: How they can jointly contribute to strengthening social cohesion," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(3), pages 13-32, July.
    15. Gaël Giraud & Cécile Renouard & Hélène L'Huillier & Raphaële de La Martinière & Camille Sutter, 2012. "Relational Capability: A Multidimensional Approach," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00827690, HAL.
    16. Jacqueline Beuningen & Hans Schmeets, 2013. "Developing a Social Capital Index for the Netherlands," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 859-886, September.
    17. Ollendorf, Franziska & Sieber, Stefan & Löhr, Katharina, 2023. "Societal dynamics of sustainability certification in Ghanaian cocoa producing communities: Assessing social cohesion effects and their implications for collective action," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 47(2), pages 212-238.
    18. Betts, Alexander & Flinder Stierna, Maria & Omata, Naohiko & Sterck, Olivier, 2023. "Refugees welcome? Inter-group interaction and host community attitude formation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    19. Z. Goosen & E. J. Cilliers, 2020. "Enhancing Social Sustainability Through the Planning of Third Places: A Theory-Based Framework," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 835-866, August.
    20. Koopmans, Ruud & Schaeffer, Merlin, 2016. "Statistical and Perceived Diversity and Their Impacts on Neighborhood Social Cohesion in Germany, France and the Netherlands," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 125(3), pages 853-883.
    21. Strupat, Christoph, 2021. "The preserving effect of social protection on social cohesion during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from Kenya," IDOS Discussion Papers 33/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), revised 2021.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:7448-:d:841628. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.