Measures of San
Antonio’s Social Capital—Civic Engagement
By Darla Norton, Research Associate, Juanita M.
Firestone, Ph.D., Professor, and Arturo Vega, Ph.D., Associate Professor
Issue: This issue brief examines civic engagement at the community level for Bexar County, (San Antonio,) Texas. Normally, levels of nonelectoral behavior like organizational involvement are highly associated with electoral involvement. People who vote are more likely to participate in community and organizational meetings and vice versa. Education and income levels are also typically considered bell weathers for participation in communities. In other words, individuals with higher educational attainment and income levels are more likely to participate in community and organizational meetings than other individuals. Moreover, participation in nonelectoral activities like community and organizational meetings contribute to a neighborhood or city’s level of social capital.
Here our research questions are: What are the levels of civic engagement in San Antonio, Texas? And, are there significant variations in levels of civic engagement among key demographic groups that make up the community? For example, do San Antonio’s Latinos and African Americans have lower levels of civic engagement relative to others (inner city, poor, women, lower and higher educated, non-Latino ethnic and racial members)?
Data and Methods: Data for this study were collected during the San Antonio Survey 2003 (SAS 2003), which was conducted during the weeks of October 12-28th, 2003.[i] Responses are from a random probability sample of the general population of adults 18 years of age and older in Bexar County, (San Antonio) Texas, with listed phone numbers. A split sample design produced 423 responses from a random sample of individuals within the county, and an additional oversample of 136 respondents living on San Antonio’s West Side for a total of 559 respondents.[ii]
To measure levels of civic engagement, two questions are examined: “How frequently have you attended a public meeting in which there was a discussion of town or school affairs?” (PUBLIC MEETING) and “How frequently have you attended a club or organizational meeting, not counting work related meeting?” (ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING).[iii]
Findings: Overall, levels of nonelectoral participation in the San Antonio area are characteristically low. Nearly half the respondents, for example, indicated that they “never” attend a public meeting (48%), while only just over one in ten (11.4%) said they attend public meetings “frequently.” In addition nearly a quarter of the respondents (23%) said they attend public meetings “sometimes” and slightly fewer (17.5%) reported that they “seldom” attended a public meeting (see Figure 1).
When asked about attending a club or organization meeting, again, nearly half the respondents (47.3%) indicated that they “never” attend such meetings (see Figure 2). Two out of ten respondents (20%) said they attended a club meeting “frequently” (this compares to about one in ten (11.4%) respondents who said they attended a public meeting frequently) and almost (19%) of the respondents indicated they attended club meetings “sometimes.” Just over fourteen percent (14.3%) reported they “seldom” attend club meetings.
Table 1 presents the distributions for the two questions of civic engagement (attending a public or organizational meeting) by demographic groupings. Interestingly, the only factors that were statistically significant for attendance of a public meeting, for example, were educational attainment and sex. Education was moderately associated with ‘PUBLIC MEETING’ with respondents who had less than a high school or a high school education least likely to attend public meetings. Females were also less likely to attend public meetings than males (29.4% vs. 37.5%), however the relationship was weak.
Table 1: Civic Engagement by
Demographic Determinants
ATTENDED PUBLIC MEETING ATTENDED ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING
|
|
SELDOM |
FREQUENTLY |
Chi.Sq. |
Sig |
Cramersv |
Gamma |
SELDOM |
FREQUENTLY |
Chi.Sq. |
Sig |
Cramersv |
Gamma |
|
AGE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-29 |
71.7% |
28.3% |
5.13 |
n/s |
0.10 |
0.02 |
70.0% |
30.0% |
2.30 |
n/s |
0.07 |
0.08 |
|
30-39 |
69.0% |
31.0% |
|
|
|
|
67.4% |
32.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
40-49 |
61.5% |
38.5% |
|
|
|
|
64.6% |
35.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
50-64 |
62.1% |
37.9% |
|
|
|
|
61.1% |
38.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
65+ |
72.1% |
27.9% |
|
|
|
|
63.4% |
36.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0-29,999k |
70.4% |
29.6% |
1.78 |
n/s |
0.07 |
0.07 |
75.0% |
25.0% |
12.01 |
0.01 |
0.18 |
0.28 |
|
$30-59,999k |
63.0% |
37.0% |
|
|
|
|
59.0% |
41.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
$60,000k + |
67.0% |
33.0% |
|
|
|
|
56.6% |
43.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
LOOP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inside |
67.4% |
66.6% |
0.04 |
n/s |
0.01 |
0.02 |
64.9% |
35.1% |
0.04 |
n/s |
0.01 |
0.02 |
|
Outside |
66.6% |
33.4% |
|
|
|
|
64.0% |
36.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
RACETH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
White |
66.8% |
33.2% |
2.33 |
n/s |
0.07 |
|
55.1% |
44.9% |
15.89 |
0.01 |
0.18 |
|
|
Hispanic |
68.3% |
31.7% |
|
|
|
|
72.7% |
27.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
Black |
55.6% |
44.4% |
|
|
|