Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Coupling Social Solidarity and Social Harmony in Hong Kong

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The various forms of social solidarity are empirically uncharted, especially in relation to social harmony. With respect to resource exchange theory, inclusive solidarity or intergroup acceptance is more conducive to social harmony than mechanical, organic, distributive, and dialogic forms of solidarity. The theoretical prediction holds in the present study that surveyed 1,093 Hong Kong Chinese. Importantly, one’s experience of inclusive solidarity tended to contribute to one’s practice of social harmony and experience of societal social harmony. Moreover, results show that experiences of organic, distributive, and dialogic solidarity also appeared to induce the practice of social harmony. In contrast, mechanical solidarity did not seem to be helpful for sustaining social harmony. Different forms of solidarity thereby exhibit differential impacts on social harmony.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The single-factor model was unsuitable because the factor loadings of three of the five forms of solidarity were lower than .30. Although a two-factor model with oblimin rotation showed a good fit (p = .517), the factor loadings of mechanical and distributive solidarity on one were lower than .30, when organic solidarity was the only one having a strong loading on another factor. The low factor loadings suggested the inadequacy of the two-factor model. A three-factor model was also unfavorable because organic solidarity had high loadings on two of the three factors. Furthermore, a four-factor model was unfavorable because none of the solidarity indicators loaded highly on the fourth factor. Hence, none of the factors models was empirically and theoretically sound.

References

  • Alwin, D. F. (1988). Structural equation model in research on human development and aging. In K. W. Schaie, R. T. Campbell, W. Meredith, & S. C. Rawlings (Eds.), Methodological issues in aging research (pp. 71–170). New York: Springer.

  • Baugher, J. E. (2003). Caught in the middle? Worker identity under new participatory roles. Sociological Forum, 18(3), 417–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization: Politics. Tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bekkers, R. (2008). Straight from the heart. Advances in Medical Sociology, 10, 197–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, S. R. (2002). Considering social cohesion in quality of life assessments: Concept and measurement. Social Indicators Research, 58, 403–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

  • Bornschier, V., Herkenrath, M., & Konig, C. (2005). The double dividend of expanding education for development. International Sociology, 20(4), 506–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braaten, J. (1991). Habermas’s critical theory of society. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, A.-M. (2009). The Beijing Olympics as a campaign of mass distraction. China Quarterly, 197, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Pierce, K. P. (2005). Social identity complexity and outgroup tolerance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(3), 428–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burroughs, S. M., & Eby, L. T. (1998). Psychological sense of community at work: A measurement system and explanatory framework. Journal of Community Psychology, 26(6), 509–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, C. (2002). Imagining solidarity: Cosmopolitanism, constitutional patriotism, and the public sphere. Public Culture, 14(1), 147–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartier, C. (2008). Culture and the city: Hong Kong, 1997–2007. China Review, 8(1), 59–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, J., & Chan, E. (2006). Charting the state of social cohesion in Hong Kong. China Quarterly, 635–658.

  • Chen, C. (2006). Does the completeness of a household-based convoy matter in intergenerational support exchanges? Social Indicators Research, 79, 117–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, S. W. K., & Lui, T.-l. (2004). Testing the global city-social polarisation thesis: Hong Kong since the 1990s. Urban Studies, 41(10), 1863–1888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, J. C. (1999). Situating psychological well-being: Exploring the cultural roots of its theory and research. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77(2), 141–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemence, A. (2001). Social positioning and social representations. In K. Deaux & G. Philogene (Eds.), Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions (pp. 83–95). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P., Cohen, J., Teresi, J., Margaret Marchi, C., & Velez, N. (1990). Problems in the measurement of latent variables in structural equations causal models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14(2), 183–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow, G. (2002). Social solidarities: Theories. Identities and social change. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayton-Johnson, J. (2003). Social capital, social cohesion, community: A microeconomic analysis. In L. Osberg (Ed.), Economic implications of social cohesion (pp. 43–78). Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devine, F., & Roberts, J. M. (2003). Alternative approaches to researching social capital: A comment on van Deth’s measuring social capital. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(1), 93–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duhaime, G., Searles, E., Usher, P. J., Myers, H., & Frechetti, P. (2004). Social cohesion and living conditions in the Canadian Arctic: From theory to measurement. Social Indicators Research, 66, 295–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, E. [1893] 1933. The division of labor in society (G. Simpson, Trans.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

  • Ellis, R. D., Fischer, N., & Sauer, J. B. (2006). Foundations of civic engagement: Rethinking social and political philosophy. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, B. (2004). The distribution of gendered social capital in Canada. In H. Flap & B. Volker (Eds.), Creation and returns of social capital: A new research program (pp. 27–50). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esses, V. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Armstrong, T. L. (2001). The immigration dilemma: The role of perceived group competition, ethnic prejudice, and national identity. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 389–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estes, R. J. (2005). Quality of life in Hong Kong: Past accomplishments and future prospects. Social Indicators Research, 71, 183–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (1996). A moderate communitarian proposal. Political Theory, 24(2), 155–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foa, U. G., Tornblom, K. Y., Foa, E. B., & Converse, J., Jr. (1993). Resource theory in social psychology. In U. G. Foa, J. Converse Jr., K. Y. Tornblom, & E. B. Foa (Eds.), Resource theory: Explorations and applications (pp. 1–10). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrest, R., & Kearns, A. (2001). Social cohesion, social capital and the neighborhood. Urban Studies, 38(12), 2125–2143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrest, R., La Grange, A., & Yip, N.-m. (2004). Hong Kong as a global city? Social distance and spatial differentiation. Urban Studies, 41(1), 207–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, V., Mourato, S., Pearce, D., & Ozdemiroglu, E. (2001). The price of virtue: The economic value of the charitable sector. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazer, E. (1999). The problems of communitarian politics: Unity and conflict. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedkin, N. E. (2004). Social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 409–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godoy, R., Reyes-Garcia, V., Huanca, T., Leonard, W. R., Olvera, R. G., Bauehet, J., et al. (2007). The role of community and individuals in the formation of social capital. Human Ecology, 35, 709–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A., Preston, J., & Sabutes, R. (2003). Education, equity and social cohesion: A distributional approach. Compare, 33(4), 453–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan, Y., Bond, M. H., Huang, Z., Zhang, Z., Deng, H., Hu, T., et al. (2009). Role of personal endorsement of outgroup members’ distinctive values and need for cognitive closure in attitude towards the outgroup. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 54–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. [1981] 1987. The theory of communicative action, Vol. 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Harpham, T., Grant, E., & Thomas, E. (2002). Measuring social capital within health surveys: Key issues. Health Policy & Planning, 17(1), 106–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawdon, J., Ryan, J., & Mobley, C. (2000). An evaluation of community antiviolence programs: Implications of some preliminary findings. Research in Community Sociology, 10, 165–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, K., Hayne, M., & Hampshire, A. (2007). Gender, social capital and location: Understanding the interactions. International Journal of Social Welfare, 16, 110–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, D. P. (1972). Employing nominal variables, induced variables, and block variables in path analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 1(2), 147–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, S. S. M., & Chan, R. S. Y. (2009). Social harmony in Hong Kong: Level, determinants and policy implications. Social Indicators Research, 91, 37–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, M., & Stokes, L. O. (2003). Hong Kong in New York: Global connections, national identity, and film representations. New Political Science, 25, 509–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houtman, D. (2000). The working class and the welfare state support for economic redistribution, tolerance for nonconformity and the conditionality of solidarity with the unemployed. Netherlands. Journal of Social Sciences, 36(1), 37–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulse, K., & Stone, W. (2007). Social cohesion, social capital and social exclusion: A cross-cultural comparison. Policy Studies, 28(2), 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, K.-k. (2000). Chinese relationalism: Theoretical construction and methodological considerations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30(2), 155–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joassart-Marcelli, P. (2005). Working poverty in southern California: Towards an operational measure. Social Science Research, 34, 20–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. F. (2001). Social ties and mental health. Journal of Urban Health, 78(3), 458–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearns, A., & Forrest, R. (2000). Social cohesion and multilevel urban governance. Urban Studies, 37(5/6), 995–1017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Dimak, M., Best, J., & Craighill, P. (2006). Gauging the impact of growing nonresponse on attitudes from a national RDD telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 759–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilburn, J. C., Jr., & Maume, M. O. (2000). The paradox of neighborhood association existence and membership. Research in Community Sociology, 10, 327–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsbury, N., & Scanzoni, J. (1993). Structural-functionalism. In P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 195–217). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluegal, J. R., & Bobo, L. D. (2001). Perceived group discrimination and policy attitudes: The sources and consequences of the race and gender gaps. In A. O’Connor, C. Tilly, & L. D. Bobo (Eds.), Urban inequality: Evidence from four cities (pp. 163–213). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuan, H.-c., & Lau, S.-k. (2002). Between liberal autocracy and democracy: Democratic legitimacy in Hong Kong. Democratization, 9(4), 58–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Grange, A., & Pretorius, F. (2002). Private rental housing in Hong Kong. Housing Studies, 17(5), 721–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, R. E. (1991). The market experience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leach, C., van Wayne, M., Zomeren, S., Vliek, M. L. W., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B., et al. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.-h. (1996). Liberal rights or/and Confucian virtues? Philosophy East & West, 46(3), 367–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Letki, N. (2008). Does diversity erode social cohesion? Social capital and race in British neighbourhoods. Political Studies, 56, 99–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M., Prosser, A., Evans, D., & Recher, S. (2005). Identity and emergency intervention: How our group membership and inclusiveness of group boundaries shape helping behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, M. W., & Oldendick, R. W. (1999). Call screening: Is it really a problem for survey research? Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 577–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, D. (1992). Solidarity and schism: The problem of disorder in Durkheimian and Marxist sociology. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenstein, A., & Daatland, S. O. (2006). Filial norms and family support in a comparative cross-national context: Evidence from the OASIS study. Ageing & Society, 26, 213–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloutas, T., & Maloutas, M. P. (2004). The glass menagerie of urban governance and social cohesion: Concepts and stakes/concepts as stakes. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(2), 449–465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. M. (2003). How important is social class identification in Taiwan? Sociological Quarterly, 44(1), 37–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, G., Rose, D., Newby, H., & Vogler, C. (1988). Social class in modern Britain. London: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mastain, L. (2007). A phenomenological investigation of altruism as experienced by moral exemplars. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 38, 62–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Brashears, M. E. (2006). Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades. American Sociological Review, 71(3), 353–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, J., & Livermore, M. (2005). Development theory and community practice. In M. Weil (Ed.), The handbook of community practice (pp. 153–168). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molm, L. D. (2006). The social exchange framework. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 24–45). Stanford, CA: Stanford Social Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(3), 745–758.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulford, M., Orbell, J., Shatto, C., & Stockard, J. (1998). Physical attractiveness, opportunity, and success in everyday exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 103(6), 1565–1592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, H.-P. (1994). Social differentiation and organic solidarity: The division of labor revisited. Sociological Forum, 9(1), 73–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, L. C., & Dugan, E. (1991). Elderly social relationships with adult children and close friends and depression. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(2), 315–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2006). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noronha, C. (2002). Chinese cultural values and total quality climate. Managing Service Quality, 12(4), 210–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2009). What is social capital. In V. O. Bartkus, J. H. Davis, & E. Elgar (Eds.), Social capital: Reaching out, reaching in (pp. 17–38). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pescosolido, B. A., Tuch, S. A., & Martin, J. K. (2001). The profession of medicine and the public: Examining Americans’ changing confidence in physician authority from the beginning of the health care crisis to the era of health care reform. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. (2006). Quality of life: Concept, policy and practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramod, C. R. (2008). The spectacle of the Beijing Olympics and the dynamics of state-society relationship in PRC. China Report, 44(2), 111–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raykov, T., & Grayson, D. (2003). A test for change of composite reliability in scale development. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(2), 143–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C., & Johnson, C. (1990). What is the relationship between socioemotional behavior and status in task groups? American Journal of Sociology, 95(5), 1189–1212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. (2005). The search for community cohesion: Key themes and dominant concepts of the public policy agenda. Urban Studies, 42(8), 1418–1427. (75–231).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfield, M. J. (2005). A critique of exchange theory in mate selection. American Journal of Sociology, 110(5), 1284–1325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiter, S., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). National context, religiosity, and volunteering: Results from 53 countries. American Sociological Review, 71(2), 191–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, C. T., & Nichols, J. S. (1983). The next-birthday method of respondent selection. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 270–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, M. (1997). Paradigm lost: The persisting search for community in U.S. health policy. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 22(4), 937–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulenberg, J. L. (2003). The social context of police discretion with young offenders: An ecological analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 127–157.

  • Scott, W. A., Scott, R., & Stumpf, J. (1989). Adaptation of immigrants: Individual differences and determinants. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, A., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2008). Marital status and social well-being: Are the married always better off. Social Indicators Research, 88, 329–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharabany, R. (1994). Intimate friendship scale: Conceptual underpinnings, psychometric properties and construct validity. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 11, 449–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (2001). Goals, congruence, and positive well-being: New empirical support for humanistic theories. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 41(1), 30–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siisiainen, M. (2003). One concept, two approaches: Bourdieu and Putnam on social capital. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 40(2), 183–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, M., & Parrott, T. M. (2001). Attitudes toward government, policies that assist informal caregivers. Research on Aging, 23, 349–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. L., & McDermott, M. (2006). The presence of organizational resources in poor urban neighborhoods: An analysis of average and contextual effects. Social Forces, 84(3), 1697–1724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, D. (2003). What do we know about social cohesion: The research perspective of the federal government’s social cohesion research network. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 28, 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, D., & Smeltzer, S. (2003). Many happy returns: How social cohesion attracts investment. In Lars. Osberg (Ed.), Economic implications of social cohesion (pp. 231–240). Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, M. J. (1989). Social support: Diverse theoretical perspectives. Social Science and Medicine, 28(12), 1275–1282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturm, D. (1998). Solidarity and suffering: Toward a politics of relationality. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SunWolf, (2008). Peer groups: Expanding our study of small group communication. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svallfors, S. (1991). The politics of welfare policy in Sweden: Structural determinants and attitudinal cleavages. British Journal of Sociology, 42(4), 609–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swenson, D. (2004). A neo-functionalist synthesis of theories in family sociology. Lesiston, NY: Edwin Mellin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor-Gooby, P., Hastie, C., & Bromley, C. (2003). Querulous citizens: Welfare knowledge and the limits to welfare reform. Social Policy & Administration, 37(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tornblom, K. Y., & Nilsson, B. O. (1993). The effect of matching resources to sources on their perceived importance and sufficiency. In U. G. Foa, J. Converse Jr., K. Y. Tornblom, & E. B. Foa (Eds.), Resource theory: Explorations and applications (pp. 81–96). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tornblom, K. Y., & Vermunt, R. (2007). Towards an integration of distributive justice, procedural justice, and social resource theories. Social Justice Research, 20, 312–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Tsang, S.-k. (1999). The Hong Kong economy: Opportunities out of the crisis? Journal of Contemporary China, 8(20), 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H. (1988). A theory of social interaction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(3), 369–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., Voci, A., & Vonofakou, C. (2008). A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis: The mediating role of intergroup activity, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 843–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulbig, S. G. (2002). Policies, procedures, and people: Sources of support for government? Social Science Quarterly, 83(3), 789–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oorschot, W., & Arts, W. (2005). The social capital of European welfare states: The crowding out hypothesis revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 15(1), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (1998). Quality-of-life in individualistic society: A comparison of 43 nations in the early 1990s. Social Indicators Research, 48, 157–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissberg, R. (2008). Pernicious tolerance: How teaching to accept differences undermines civil society. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, D. (2003). Social policy and solidarity, orphans of the new model of social cohesion. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 28(1), 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcox, P., Quisenberry, N., Cabrera, D. T., & Jones, S. (2004). Busy places and broken windows? Toward defining the role of physical structure and process in community crime models. Sociological Quarterly, 45(2), 185–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, G. (2001). Support for redistributive policies among the African American middle class: Race and class effects. Research in Social Stratification & Mobility, 18, 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, L. (2006). Developing a model for the measurement of social inclusion and social capital in regional Australia. Social Indicators Research, 75, 335–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), 225–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, E. O. (1997). Class counts: Comparative studies in class analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagorski, K. (1999). Egalitarianism, perception of conflicts, and support for transformation in Poland. In S. Svallfors & P. Taylor-Gooby (Eds.), The end of the welfare state? Responses to state retrenchment (pp. 190–217). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Chau-kiu Cheung & Stephen Kan Ma

Authors
  1. Chau-kiu Cheung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Kan Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chau-kiu Cheung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cheung, Ck., Ma, S.K. Coupling Social Solidarity and Social Harmony in Hong Kong. Soc Indic Res 103, 145–167 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9702-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9702-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation