TY - JOUR
T1 - Social infrastructure as a proxy for social capital
T2 - A spatial exploration into model specification and measurement impacts in Los Angeles, California
AU - Nelson, Jake R.
AU - Bienenstock, Elisa J.
AU - Palladino, Anthony
AU - Barrera, Eduardo
AU - Grubesic, Tony H.
N1 - Funding Information:
The research and development described in this paper was partially sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), under contract 140D16318C0063. This paper is approved for public release, distribution unlimited. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of DARPA or the U.S. government.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Urban Affairs Association.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Measurement of community social capital most often relies on the self-reports of individuals aggregated to the community level. This reliance on validated survey-based methods for operationalizing social capital data collection is not always feasible. As a consequence, recent studies exploring data obtainable from open sources have utilized features of the built environment as a proxy. Although gaining in popularity, this approach is controversial. We suggest that the dissension is due to issues with variation in measurement approaches and model specification. Using Los Angeles, California, as a case study, we aim to advance the use of “social infrastructure” as a way of estimating social capital in two ways. First, we refine a geospatial clustering technique to illustrate changes in spatial pattern of social infrastructure under alternative conceptualizations. Second, we explore the sensitivity of social infrastructure models to the type of infrastructure used. This analysis illuminates a key source of discrepancies in the existing literature and recommends an approach for more precise model specification and measurement.
AB - Measurement of community social capital most often relies on the self-reports of individuals aggregated to the community level. This reliance on validated survey-based methods for operationalizing social capital data collection is not always feasible. As a consequence, recent studies exploring data obtainable from open sources have utilized features of the built environment as a proxy. Although gaining in popularity, this approach is controversial. We suggest that the dissension is due to issues with variation in measurement approaches and model specification. Using Los Angeles, California, as a case study, we aim to advance the use of “social infrastructure” as a way of estimating social capital in two ways. First, we refine a geospatial clustering technique to illustrate changes in spatial pattern of social infrastructure under alternative conceptualizations. Second, we explore the sensitivity of social infrastructure models to the type of infrastructure used. This analysis illuminates a key source of discrepancies in the existing literature and recommends an approach for more precise model specification and measurement.
KW - Social infrastructure
KW - built environment
KW - community social capital
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144176662&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144176662&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/07352166.2022.2133724
DO - 10.1080/07352166.2022.2133724
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85144176662
SN - 0735-2166
JO - Journal of Urban Affairs
JF - Journal of Urban Affairs
ER -