IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocxx/v11y2016i1p1-17.html

Recent trends in civic disengagement

Author

Listed:
  • Robin G. Milne

Abstract

This study takes as its point of departure Putman’s classic study, Bowling Alone, on disengagement among voluntary organisations in America. This study views disengagement in terms of absence from pre-arranged situations, such as booked appointments, and the non-takeup of statutory means-tested benefits. Whereas Putman finds disengagement in America became more common from the 1960s, we find the opposite in the United Kingdom over the last 10 to 20 years. Central governments in the United Kingdom have been active in addressing absence and non-takeup in the areas studied. Absence may be a problem for schools, hospitals and the workplace, but for some pupils and employees they may be a symptom of poor relations within the organisation, and for some patients the outcome of the hospital’s administrative failure. A common stated feature in the non-takeup of means-tested benefits is the stigma associated with it. By way of contrast, the takeup of Child Benefit had been virtually complete. The question – whether the high takeup was because of the administrative simplicity of Child Benefit and its significant cash benefits over the long term, or because it was not means tested – might be resolved post-January 2013, when its eligibility and the size of benefit became income based.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin G. Milne, 2016. "Recent trends in civic disengagement," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocxx:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:1-17
    DOI: 10.1080/21582041.2016.1223869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/21582041.2016.1223869
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/21582041.2016.1223869?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    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:taf:rsocxx:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:1-17. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsoc21 .

    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.