Generations and Organizational Change

  • Dag Wollebæk
  • Per Selle
Chapter
Part of the Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies book series (NCSS)

Abstract

These concerns reflect the current mood in many traditional voluntary associations in Norway. Leaders in a wide range of fields within the sector seem to agree that the communal spirit is waning. It is commonly claimed that careerists, individualists and egoists with little time to spare represent an increasing proportion of the population. As a study of changing value patterns in Norwegian society shows, these values are difficult to reconcile with commitment to voluntary organizations (Hellevik, 1996). Furthermore, since young people distinguish themselves as the most egocentric and materialist age group of all (op. cit.), one might expect slow erosion of voluntary organising following the exit of older, more idealistic generations from the population.

Keywords

Young People Social Capital Organizational Change Voluntary Organization Housing Association 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Almås, R., Karlsen, K.H., & Thorland, I. (1995). Fra pliktsamfunn til mulighetstorg. Trondheim: Centre for Rural Research.Google Scholar
  2. Andresen, Ø. (1999). Organisasjonsdeltakelse i Norgre fra 1983 til 1997. Oslo-Kongsvinger, Central Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (1997). Risiko og frihet. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  4. Foley, M., & Edwards, B. (1996). The paradox of civil society. Journal of Democracy, 7, 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hellevik, O. (1993). Postmaterialism as a dimension of cultural change. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hellevik, O. (1996). Nordmenn ogdetgode liv. Norsk monitor 1985–1995. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  7. Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Mannheim, K. (1980 [1928]). The problem of generation. [Das Problem der Generationen]. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowledge (pp. 276–320). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  10. Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Putnam, R. (1995a). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, l (January): 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Putnam, R. (1995b). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science & Politics, 28, 664–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  14. Rokkan, S. (1967). Geography, religion and social class: Crosscutting cleavages in Norwegian politics. In S.M. Lipset & S. Rokkan (Eds.), Party systems and voter alignments. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  15. Rueschemeyer, D. (1998). The self-organisation of society and democratic rule: Specifying the relationship. In D. Rueschemeyer, M. Rueschemeyer & B. Wittrock (Eds.), Participation and democracy: East and west. Comparisons and interpretations.Armonk, NY/London, UK: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  16. Seile, P., & Øymyr, B. (1995). Frivillig organisering og demokrati. Det jrivillige organisasjonssamfunnet 1940–1990. Oslo: Det Norske Samlaget.Google Scholar
  17. Skocpol, T. (1996). Unravelling from above. The American Prospect (no. 25, March-April).Google Scholar
  18. Skocpol, T., Ganz, M., & Munson, Z. (2000). A nation of organizers: The institutional origins of civic voluntarism in the United States. American Political Science Review, 94, 527–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Statistical Yearbook (2000). Oslo/Kongsvinger: Central Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
  20. Stinchcombe, A.L. (1965). Social Structure and Organization. In J.G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  21. Wollebæk, D., & Seile, P. (2002a). Det nye organisasjonssamfunnet: Demokrati i omforming. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  22. Wollebæk, D., & Seile, P. (2002b). Does participation in voluntary associations contribute to social capital? The importance of intensity, scope, and type. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 31, 2, 32–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wollebaek, D., Seile, P., & Lorentzen, H. (1998). Undersøkelse om frivillig innsats. Dokumentasjonsrapport. Notat 9834. Bergen: LOS-senteret.Google Scholar
  24. Wollebaek, D., Seile, P., & Lorentzen, H. (2000). Frivilliginnsats. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  25. Øia, T. (1995). Apolitisk ungdom? Sjølbergingsgenerasjonen ogpolitiske verdier. Oslo: Cappelens Akade-miske Forlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dag Wollebæk
  • Per Selle

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations