Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:56:42.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social inclusion of the older population in response to the 2008 financial tsunami in Hong Kong

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 December 2012

CHAU-KIU CHEUNG  and
KWAN-KWOK LEUNG
CHAU-KIU CHEUNG*
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
KWAN-KWOK LEUNG
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Social Studies, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
*
Address for correspondence: Chau-kiu Cheung, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Social inclusion of the older population in employment, housing, social protection and other livelihood aspects was predicted to suffer because of the financial tsunami in Hong Kong in 2008. An expected mitigating factor of the impact on social inclusion was social cohesion, which is the focus of the present study. A total of 1,352 Hong Kong Chinese adults were surveyed in 2009. The results show that social cohesion is perceived in Hong Kong to have mitigated the negative impact of the financial tsunami in terms of support for public policy relating to social inclusion of the older population. These results have implications for sustaining social cohesion as a means to promote the social inclusion of the older population.

Keywords

social inclusionsfinancial crisissocial cohesionfinancial losssocial welfareself-interest
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 33 , Issue 1: Ageing and Social Inclusion/Exclusion , January 2013 , pp. 64 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bell, J. M. and Hartmann, D. 2007. Diversity in everyday discourse, the cultural ambiguities and consequences of happy talk. American Sociological Review, 72, 6, 895–914.Google Scholar
Billiet, J. B. and Davidov, E. 2008. Testing the stability of an acquiescence style factor behind two interrelated substantive variables in a panel design. Sociological Methods & Research, 36, 4, 542–62.Google Scholar
Blair, C. A., Thompson, L. F. and Wuenseh, K. L. 2005. Electronic helping behavior, the virtual presence of other makes a difference. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 27, 2, 171–8.Google Scholar
Blekesaune, M. and Quadagno, J. 2003. Public attitudes toward welfare state policies: a comparative analysis of 24 nations. European Sociological Review, 19, 5, 415–29.Google Scholar
Boersch-Supan, A. 2007. European welfare state regimes and their generosity toward the elderly. In Papadimitriou, D. B. (ed.), Government Spending on the Elderly. Palgrave, Basingstoke, UK, 23–47.Google Scholar
Bouton, M. E., Mineka, S. and Barlow, D. H. 2001. A modern learning theory perspective on the etiology of panic disorder. Psychological Review, 108, 1, 4–32.Google Scholar
Brinberg, D. and Castell, P. [1982] 1993. A resource exchange theory approach to interpersonal interactions: a test of Foa's theory. In Foa, U. G., Converse, J. Jr, Tornblom, K. Y. and Foa, E. B. (eds), Resource Theory, Explorations and Applications. Academic, San Diego, California, 41–56.Google Scholar
Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T. A. and Dawes, R. M. 2002. Swift neighbors and persistent strangers: a cross-cultural investigation of trust and reciprocity in social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 1, 168–206.Google Scholar
Campbell, A. L. 2009. Is the economic crisis driving wedges between young and old? Rich and poor? Generations, 33, 3, 47–53.Google Scholar
Cheung, C. K. and Leung, K. K. 2005. Hong Kong people's social cohesion and their dissent to national security legislation. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 42, 2, 344–64.Google Scholar
Dayton-Johnson, J. 2003. Knitted warmth, the simple analytics of social cohesion. Journal of Socio-Economics, 32, 6, 623–45.Google Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A. and Penner, L. A. 2006. The Social Psychology of Prosocial Behavior. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Espvall, M. and Dellgren, P. 2008. Can we count on each other? Reciprocity and conflicts in financial support in Sweden. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 1, 84–94.Google Scholar
Feeney, B. C. and Collins, N. L. 2001. Predictors of caregiving in adult intimate relationships, an attachment theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 80, 6, 972–94.Google Scholar
Ferrando, P. J. and Lorenzo-Seva, U. 2010. Acquiescence as a source of bias and model and personal misfit: a theoretical and empirical analysis. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 63, 2, 427–48.Google Scholar
Gavrilova, N. S., Semyonova, V. G., Galina, N., Evdokashkina, G. N. and Gavrilov, L. 2000. The Response of Violent Mortality to Economic Crisis in Russia. Population Research & Policy Review, 19, 4, 397–419.Google Scholar
Haas, S. A. and Bishop, N. J. 2010. What do retrospective subjective reports of childhood health capture? Evidence from the Wisconsin longitudinal study. Research on Aging, 32, 6, 698–714.Google Scholar
Hermalin, A. I. and Shih, S. R. 2003. Support received by the elderly in Baoding: the view from two generations. In Whyte, M. K. (ed.), China's Revolutions and Intergenerational Relations. Center for China Studies, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 121–41.Google Scholar
Hicks, J. and Kingson, E. R. 2009. The economic crisis, how fare older Americans? Generation, 33, 3, 6–11.Google Scholar
Hulse, K. and Stone, W. 2007. Social cohesion, social capital and social exclusion: a cross-cultural comparison. Policy Studies, 28, 2, 109–26.Google Scholar
Jenson, J. 2003. New routes to social cohesion? Citizenship and the social investment state. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 28, 1, 77–99.Google Scholar
Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Dimak, M., Best, H. and Craighill, P. 2006. Gauging the impact of growing nonresponse on attitudes from a national RDD telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 5, 759–79.Google Scholar
Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. 2005. Participatory action research. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Third edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, 559–603.Google Scholar
Kingston, B., Huizinga, D. and Elliott, D. 2009. A test of social disorganization theory in high-risk urban neighborhoods. Youth & Society, 41, 1, 53–79.Google Scholar
Kumlin, S. and Svallfors, S. 2007. Social stratification and political articulation: why attitudinal class differences vary across countries. In Mau, S. and Veghte, B. (eds), Social Justice, Legitimacy and the Welfare State. Ashgate, Aldershot, UK, 19–46.Google Scholar
Letki, N. 2008. Does diversity erode social cohesion? Social capital and race in British neighbourhoods. Political Studies, 56, 1, 99–126.Google Scholar
Lincoln, K. D., Chatters, L. M. and Taylor, R. J. 2003. Psychological distress among black and white Americans: different effects of social support, negative integration and personal control. Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 44, 3, 390–407.Google Scholar
Maloutas, T. and Maloutas, M. P. 2004. The glass menagerie of urban governance and social cohesion, concepts and stakes/concepts as stakes. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 28, 2, 449–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, J. S. and Erickson, L. 2007. Welfare state structures and the structure of welfare state support, attitudes towards social spending in Canada, 1993–2000. European Journal of Political Research, 47, 4, 411–35.Google Scholar
Mishkin, F. S. 2009. Is monetary policy effective during financial crises? American Economic Review, 99, 2, 573–7.Google Scholar
Molm, L. D. 2006. The social exchange framework. In Burke, P. J. (ed.), Contemporary Social Psychological Theories. Stanford Social Sciences, Stanford, California, 24–45.Google Scholar
Musick, M. A. and Wilson, J. 2008. Volunteers: A Social Profile. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana.Google Scholar
Nielsen, M., Juon, H. S. and Ensminger, M. 2004. Preventing long-term welfare receipt: the theoretical relationship between health and poverty over the early life course. Social Science & Medicine, 59, 11, 2285–301.Google Scholar
Oesterle, S., Johnson, M. K. and Mortimer, J. T. 2004. Volunteerism during the transition to adulthood: a life course perspective. Social Forces, 82, 3, 1123–49.Google Scholar
Oxoby, R. 2009. Understanding social inclusion, social cohesion, and social capital. International Journal of Social Economics, 35, 12, 1133–52.Google Scholar
Rajan, R. S. 2007. Financial crisis, capital outflows, and policy response: examples from East Asia. Journal of Economic Education, 38, 1, 92–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Revised edition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Rocha, H. O. and Ghoshal, S. 2006. Beyond self-interest revisited. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 3, 585–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, D. and Smeltzer, S. 2003. Many happy returns: how social cohesion attracts investment. In Osberg, L. (ed.), Economic Implications of Social Cohesion. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 231–40.Google Scholar
Street, D. and Cossman, J. S. 2006. Greatest generation or greedy geezers? Social spending preferences and the elderly. Social Problems, 53, 1, 75–96.Google Scholar
SunWolf, 2008. Peer groups, expanding our study of small group communication. Sage, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Townsend, M. and Wilton, K. 2003. Evaluating change in attitude towards mathematics using the then–now procedure in a cooperative learning programme. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 4, 473–87.Google Scholar
van Oorschot, W. and Meuleman, B. 2011. Welfare and the multidimensionality of welfare state legitimacy, evidence from the Netherlands, 2006. International Journal of Social Welfare, 21, 1, 79–93.Google Scholar
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L. and Brady, H. E. 2004. Political equality: what do we know about it? In Neckerman, K. M. (ed.), Social Inequality. Russell Sage, New York, 635–66.Google Scholar
Wen, M., Fan, J., Jin, L. and Wang, G. 2010. Neighborhood effects on health among migrants and natives in Shanghai, China. Health & Place, 16, 3, 452–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, J. B., McNamara, T. K. and Howling, S. A. 2003. Generational equity, generational interdependence, and the framing of the debate over social security reform. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 30, 3, 3–14.Google Scholar
Zumbrunnen, J. and Gangl, A. 2008. Conflict, fusion, or coexistence? The complexity of contemporary American conservatism. Political Behavior, 30, 2, 199–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar