BIBLIOGRAPHY BALLAGAN, TRACY P....
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BALLAGAN, TRACY P. APRIL 2009. Social capital Among Members of
Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya.
Adviser: Dr. Marie Klondy T. Dagupen
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to find out the demographic profile of the respondents,
to determine the level of social capital among members of Malabing Valley Multi-
Purpose Cooperative along informal networks, trust, poverty perception, participation in
the cooperative and participation within social activities, and life satisfaction, to
determine the relationship of social capital variable with relationship between sociability
variable and position in cooperative, relationship between sociability variable and age,
relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group and relationship
between poverty perception and position in household and to suggested specific actions
to improve social capital in the cooperative.
The study made use of questionnaire as the main instrument for gathering data.
There were 50 respondents chosen by random. The survey was done on January 10, 2009.
Social capital components were measured using a five point Likert Scale.
Frequencies and means were obtains using the Soft ware Statistical Package for the
Social sciences (SPSS) and One-way Analysis of Variance was used to determine the
relationships between the respondents profile with social capital variables.
Results from this study revealed that only few of the respondents have and
where a member of a group or organization in their community but then when it comes to
their cooperative, the respondents believe and proud of with their coop. However in
visiting co members in their home, ethno linguistic affect.
Recommendations to these identified problems were to encourage the members of
the community to be aware and join groups and conducting more team building and
recreation activities by the different group of the cooperative.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography.………………………………………………………………
i
Abstract………… …………………………………………………………
i
Table of contents.………………………………………………….……….
iii
INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………
1
Background of the Study…………………………………………….
1
Statement of the Problem……………………………………...…….
3
Objective of the Study……………………………………………….
4
Importance of the Study……………………………………….……
5
REVIEW OF LITERATURE………………………………………………
5
Definition of Social Capital………………………………………….
6
Benefits Derived from Social Capital…………………………..……
7
Forms of Social Capital………………………………………...…..
8
Component of Social Capital…………………………………..……
10
Indicators of Social Capital…………………………………….……
11
Definition of Terms…………………………………………………
12
METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………
13
Locale and Time of Study………………………………………..
13
Respondents of the Study…………………………………………
13
Data Collection………………………………………………….…
13
iii
Data Analysis……………………………………………………..
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS…………………………………….....
15
Demographic Profile of the Respondents…………………………
15
Level of Social Capital…………………………………………….
18
Level of Trust of Respondents…………………………………...
21
Poverty Perception of Respondents……………………………..…
24
Participation in Cooperative…………………………………….…
25
Life Satisfaction of Respondents………………………………...…
28
Relationship between Social Capital
Variable with the Respondents……………………………………..
31
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………
38
Summary……………………………………………………………
38
Conclusion………………………………………………………….
39
Recommendation……………………………………………………
40
LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………….……..
42
APPENDIX ……………………………………………….………………
44
iv
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Malabing Valley is found in the northeastern part of the Kasibu Municipality of
Nueva Vizcaya province, Philippines. This place is also known as the number one
producer of citrus fruits of different varieties making Nueva Vizcaya “The Citrus Bowl of
the Philippines”. Hardship of life in Malabing Valley is the driver for the spirit of
volunteerism and cooperativism among the valley residents. The Malabing Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative (MVMPC) was conceived through the leadership of Mr.
Alfonso Namujhe, who envisioned transforming the whole community to a modernized
agricultural area. Namujhe together with a group of young professionals from the
component barangay of Malabing Valley met to explore possible actions they can take to
accelerate the improvement of the socio-economic condition of their communities. They
perceived the need to form a farmers association, which would serve as a development
catalyst in the valley. However, when this group had the opportunity to attend a Trainers’
Training for Cooperatives conducted by the Agricultural Training Institute of the
Department of Agriculture in San Mateo, Isabela Province in September 1989, the idea of
forming a cooperative instead of an association came up. The cooperative was formally
organized in November 1989 with 48 founding members and a paid up share capital of
P16, 300. It was formally registered with the Bureau of Cooperatives on March 08, 1990
and confirmed by the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) on March 27, 1991.
The Cooperative was renamed Malabing Valley Multipurpose on November 19,
1997 when the CDA formally registered its articles of cooperation. Since then, the
cooperative’s area of business operations expanded from Malabing to the other parts of
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
2
Luzon particularly Baguio City, Tarlac, Pampanga and Metro Manila. Its new members
are also from the provinces of Isabela, Quirino and other municipalities of Nueva
Vizcaya. Presently, the cooperative has more than 500 members with total paid up share
capital of P2, 385,581 and assets totaling P27, 743,500. The cooperative, a known
specialist in citrus production is now facing greater challenges in its expanded services
from production, transporting, warehousing, processing and marketing products in
national and global market. The cooperative helps also in advocacy against the
environmental destruction in the valley and the whole municipality of Kasibu, Nueva
Vizcaya (Live the Malabing Way, 2000).
The success story of the Malabing Valley Multipurpose Cooperative inspired this
research on social capital to be conducted in the cooperative. Putnam (1995) indicated
that in an organization or in a community, social capital plays an important role because
it allows the members to resolve their problems easily by doing their own responsibility.
It also greases the wheels that allow communities to advance smoothly and improves an
organization by widening the awareness of members in many ways which their fates are
linked.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
3
Statement of Problem
This study sought to answers to the following questions:
1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents?
2. What are the levels of social capital among members of Malabing Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative along:
a. Informal Network
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
· Cooperative
· Social
e. Life Satisfaction?
3. What is the relationship of social capital variables with:
a. Relationship between sociability variable and position in coop
b. Relationship between sociability variable and age
c. Relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group
d. Relationship between poverty perception and position in household
4. What are the suggested specific actions to improve social capital for the
Cooperative?
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
4
Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study were to:
1. Determine the demographic profile of the respondents.
2. Determine the level of Social Capital among the members MALABING Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative along:
a. Informal Networks
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
· cooperative
· social
e. Life Satisfaction
3. Determine the relationship of the social capital variables with:
a. Relationship between sociability variable and position in coop
b. Relationship between sociability variable and age
c. Relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group
d. Relationship between poverty perception and position in household
4. Suggest specific actions to improve social capital for the cooperative
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
5
Importance of the Study
The result of the study would provide information regarding the importance of
social capital to cooperatives, especially Malabing Valley Multipurpose, which will serve
as guide to members in knowing their status in terms of social capital. The findings of
this study will contribute/supply information on the cooperatives level of social capital
among the members moreover, this study will determine also the relationships of the
social capital variables like relationship between Sociability variable and position in
coop, relationship between Sociability variable and age, relationship between Sociability
variable and ethno linguistic and relationship between poverty perception and position in
household
This study would also serve as a source of information for further research on
related study.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Definitions of Social Capital
Social relationships help people to get along with each other and act more
effectively than they could as isolated individuals. In this view, patterns of social
organizations, especially trust, mutuality, and reciprocity, are seen as important
resources, which can result in benefit to individuals, groups and society (Carroll 2001).
By this process social capital takes place. Wherein, social capital is defined social capital
as a “Features of the social organizations such as networks, norms, and trust that facilitate
action and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1995) He also added that social
capital is created through citizen’s active participation in organizations and groups
wherein, participation mainly leads to trust between the members in the society.
In an organizations and cooperatives, trust, reciprocity and social networks are the
basic needs in order for them to grasp the sweetness of success. Cooperatives promote
citizen engagement, social cohesion and trust by providing ordinary citizens a chance to
influence the decisions that affect their lives and allows the members to resolve their
problems easily by doing their own responsibility in the cooperative (Co-operatives
Secretariat Canada, 2004) Social capital also greases the wheels that allow communities
to advance smoothly. Also, social capital improves the cooperative by widening the
awareness in many ways which their fates are linked. People who have active and
trusting connections to others develop or maintain character traits that are good for the
rest of society. Joiners become more tolerant, less cynical, and more empathetic to the
misfortunes of others. When people lack connection to others, they are unable to test the
veracity of their own views, whether in the give or take of casual conversation or in more
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
7
formal deliberation. Without such an opportunity, people are more likely to be swayed by
their worse impulses. In addition, because social capital exists in the linkages between
such individuals, we could also imagine stepping back and forming a birds-eye view of
the entire network that emerges as an aggregate of these interlinked actors. This
alternative approach leads us to define social capital from a different angle – that of the
collective ( Claridge, 2001)
Benefits Derived from Social Capital
In high social capital areas, public spaces are cleaner, people are friendlier and the
streets are safer. There appears to be a strong relationship between the possession of
social capital and better health. Social capital also can help to mitigate or soften the
insidious or deceitful effects of socio economic disadvantages. Furthermore, social
capital may result to better knowledge sharing due to established trust relationships,
common frames of reference and shared goals. Due to high level of trust and cooperative
spirit (both within the organization and between the organization and its customers and
partnership) transaction cost will be lower. Social capital produces severance cost hiring
and training expenses, lower turnover rates, avoiding discontinuities associated with
frequent personnel changes, and maintaining valuable organizational knowledge. And
lastly, due to organizational stability and shared understanding results to a greater
coherence of action (Smith ,2008)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
8
Forms of Social Capital
One variable that affects social capital is trust where in some sees trust as a source
of social capital Trust is defined as a belief in the honesty, integrity and reliability of
others, “a Faith in people” (Taylor, Funk and Clark, 2007). Also trust is placing
confidence in others so that they will be supportive and reinforcing of you, even if you let
down your "strong'' mask and show your weaknesses. Trust also forms the basis for
social interactions, especially reciprocity and the agreements for future actions essential
for planning and working together. It is also important for the establishment of normal
relationships. The greater the trust between parties, the more effectively they will be able
to live together and cooperate in the future, which will diminish the chances that the old
conflict will re-occur, or a new unmanageable one will develop. Also, individuals who
have trust and cooperation among themselves are harnessed better and are more
productive. As with social capital, trust has to be recurrently renewed so that it can be
sustained between trustees or trustor (Milagrosa ,2007).
Another important form of social capital is reciprocity. Wherein reciprocity is
defines as a state of relationships in which there is mutual action, influence, giving and
taking, correspondence, between, two parties (Carter, 2002). Trust is the integral part of
this norm because a person who reciprocates one good action for another becomes
trustworthy. This is important because on a basic level, the decision to cooperate or not
depends on whether the other agent is reliable. On a higher level, if people within a
community reciprocate good deeds for each other, it is a general indication that a
considerable percentage of these citizens are trustworthy.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
9
On the other hand, social networks are necessary precondition for reciprocity
(Milagrosa ,2007) Social network is a social structure made of nodes (which are generally
individuals or organizations) that are tied by one or more specific types of
interdependency, such as values, visions, ideas, financial exchange, friendship, kinship,
dislike, conflict or trade.
There are a lot of variables that may affect the components of socials capital
informal networks, trust, life satisfaction, poverty perception and participation can be one
of the variables that can affect the components of social capital.
Informal network is defined as the social networks of individuals and/or
collectives without formal structures, linked by one or more social relationships such as
kinship and friendship. (Weissmann, 2008)
Trust is defined as to have faith in, to believe. (Webster dictionary, 1996). There are
two type of trust the core trust and the institutional trust. Wherein, Core trust is highly
towards trust, within the immediate environment particularly trust of his family,
neighbors, farmers, the church and respondents, own feelings of trust worthiness. While
the institutional trust is the attitudes related to trust in the formal institutional
environment with emphasis on the legal system, police and municipal government.
Positive significant relationship between municipal police and this trust shows that
individuals who have high scores in trusting the municipal police, also tends to have rate
municipal trust highly (Smith, 2008).
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
10
Participation also affects. Participation is defined as an umbrella term including
different means for the public to directly participate in political, economic, management
or other social decisions. Ideally, each actor would have a say in decisions directly
proportional to the degree that particular decision affects him or her (Wikipedia 2009).
Poverty perception is one factor that can affect social capital. Two factors loaded
heavily for these components are poverty because of laziness and poverty because of lack
of life opportunities (Milagrosa ,2007)
One more factor is the common goals. This factor measures the community
aspirations (Milagrosa ,2007) it is also well-defined set of initiatives and interventions
aimed (Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce ,2005)
And Lastly, Life satisfaction- Life satisfaction is an overall assessment of feelings
and attitudes about one’s life at a particular point in time ranging from negative to
positive. (Beutell ,2006). Individual who fined equal treatment from the government
important would load highly on the life satisfaction component (Milagrosa ,2007)
Component of Social Capital
There are two components of social capital the structural social capital and cognitive
components. The structural social capital is tangible and deals with formal institutions.
This also includes membership in formal networks, particularly in local organizations like
the church and local government. While cognitive social capital is perceived as
embedded within the people thus, intangible. This is form of trust, local ethics, tradition
and morals ( Milagrosa 2007). Furthermore, cognitive is based on mental processes and
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
11
psychology in the domain of idea and includes particularly norms, values, attitudes and
beliefs
Indicators of Social Capital
Community foundations belief, that the levels of social capital in their community is
critical important to the overall health of the community. Community foundations are
social capital builder, committed to working with all groups in their community to deploy
experimental solutions to build their community. So, social capital enables communities
to emulate others who are strong in specific areas. The more the level of participation in
voluntary associations, the greater the social capital. The more the networking, the
greater the social capital. The more the mentoring and mutual support in an organization,
the greater its social capital. The greater the prevalence of passive media (ex.,
television), the less the social capital. The greater the social capital, the more prevalent
the norm of reciprocity (bargaining, compromise, pluralism). The greater the social
capital, the higher the priority of the norm of equality. The greater the social capital, the
greater the confidence in government (and other institutions). The greater the social
capital, the easier to mobilize support for problem solutions. And the greater the social
capital, the higher the percentage of problem-solving outside the governmental sector.
The less the social capital, the greater the need to rely on authoritative controls are the
following indicators of social capital( Garson 2006).
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
12
Definition of Terms
The following are the technical terms used in the study
1. Social capital. Social capital refers to the social relationship of a member in an
organization or in a community such as trust, reciprocity, and social networks that guides
them to achieve their common goals.
2. Cooperative. Autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their
common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned
and democratically-controlled enterprise.
3. Multipurpose cooperative. It is form of two or more kinds of cooperative.
4. Members. These are the group of person who are a part of one organization
5. Trust. Belief in the honesty, integrity and reliability of others: “a Faith in
people”.
6. Informal networks. This shows the strong positive correlation of getting a long
component with people in the community.
7. Common goals. Set of initiatives and interventions aimed
8. Life satisfaction. Is an overall assessment of feelings and attitudes about one’s life
at a particular point in time ranging from negative to positive.
9.Interpersonal trust- It is the feeling that you can depend upon the other person that
meet your expectations when you are not able to control or monitor the other’s behavior.
9. Ethno linguistic. Studies the relationship between language and culture, and
the way different ethnic groups perceive the world
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
13
METHODOLOGY
Iocale and Time of the Study
The study was conducted among the members of Malabing Valley Multipurpose
Cooperative in Malabing Valley, Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya from December 2008 to
January 2009.
Respondents of the Study
There were 50 respondents composed of the Officers, management team and
members, who were chosen through purposive random sampling based on the year since
they became a member of the said cooperative.
Data Collection
The data in this study was collected through the use of questionnaires distributed
to the respondents. The questionnaire contained sections pertaining to demographic
profile of the respondents; level of social capital among the members along informal
network, trust, poverty perception, common goals and life satisfaction and also includes
social capital variables such as age, educational attainment, sex, ethnicity, number of
years of membership in the cooperative; and other related variables.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
14
Data Analysis
Social capital components were measured using a five point Likert Scale. For
example; participation in the cooperative and community activities used of a scale 1 to 5,
where 1 represents never and the other extreme point represents always. For trust, 1-
represents not trust and 5- trust very much. Frequencies and means were obtained using a
Software Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and One-way Analysis of
Variance was used to determine the relationships between the respondents profile with
social capital variables.
The mean range used in the study are: 1-1.74 equal to 1, 1.75-2.54 equal to 2,
2.55-3.34 equal to 3, 3.35-4.14 equal to 4 and 4.15-5 equal to 5. Also the level of
significance in this study is <.05
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Demographic Profile of Respondents
Thirty of the 50 respondents were household heads, 29 (50%) are females and 21
(42%) are males. Most of themes were married and the rest, 24 % and 2% were single
and widow, respectively. The mean age of the respondents was 34.34 years.
As to membership in the cooperative 90% of the respondents were regular and 88%
were plain members. Six (12%) of the respondents were officers. Almost half of the
respondents finished a degree and 14 of them are working in the cooperative. Also most
of the respondents can speak in Ilokano and coming from Kalanguya group were larger
in number.
Table 1: Profile of Respondents
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Household head
Household head
30
60
Not household head
20
40
TOTAL
50
100
Sex
Male
21
Female
42
29
58
TOTAL
50
100
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
16
Table 1 Continued…..
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Civil Status
24
Single
12
72
Married
37
2
Widower
1
TOTAL
50
100
Age
mean:34.34 years old
<31
23
46
31-40
18
36
41-50
5
10
50>
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
Position in Coop
Officer
6
12
Member
44
88
TOTAL
50
100
Membership in Coop
Associate
5
10
Regular
45
90
Educational Attainment
Elementary
7
14
Secondary
20
41
University/college
21
43
Vocational/technical
1
2
TOTAL
50
100
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
17
Table 1 continued….
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Occupation
9
18
Housewife
7
14
Self employed
6
12
Government employee
3
6
Teacher
1
2
Engineer
10
20
Farmer
14
28
Coop employee
TOTAL
50
100
Dialects Spoken
English
33
66
Tagalog
42
84
Ibaloi
3
6
Kalanguya
25
50
Iloko
43
86
Kankanaey
8
16
Tuwali/Ifugao
9
1
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
18
Table 1 Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Ethno-linguistic group
17
34
Ilokano
2
4
Kankanaey
18
36
Kalanguya
1
2
Kankanaey
3
6
Ibaloi
9
18
Ifugao
TOTAL
50
100
Level of Social Capital
Groups/Networks/Participation
Table 2 is the groups, networks that the respondents are with or a member with. In
terms of religious, few of the respondents were involved with a mean contribution of
P177.27 in a month. BIBAK and Senior Citizen are the cultural, social that the least of
the respondents are involved with a mean contribution of P100.00 per month. From the
sports group, only two of the respondents are involved and a member of Barangay sports
League with a mean contribution of P20.00 a month. In basic service group, respondent’s
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
19
increases (13 respondents) compare to cultural, social and sports group. Meanwhile,
respondents who are a member of Red Cross with four respondents have the high
percentage; Barangay Health Worker and Tanod are the next with the same percentage
with a three respondents who are a member in each and Barangay officials as the last
with a mean contribution of P107.00 a month. Above religious, cultural/social, sports
group, basic services groups and ethnic based group, production group had the highest
percent and respondents and from these twenty respondents are sixteen are farmers.
Table 2: Groups/Networks/Participation
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Religious
Belong to religious 16
32
grp
Contribution
2
18
50
3
27
100
1
9
150
3
27
200
1
9
300
1
9
500
P177.27
Mean
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
20
Table 2 continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Cultural, social
Belong to
7
14
Cultural, social
Name of cultural,
social group
BIBAK
4
67
Senior Citizen
4
33
Contribution
100
2
100
Mean
P100.00
Sports group
2
4
Name of sport group
Barangay sports
2
100
league
Contribution
20
1
P20.00
Mean
Basic services group
Have Basic service 13
26
grp
Name of basic
3
25
services group
Barangay Health
4
worker
33
Red cross
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
21
Table 2 Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Tanod
3
25
Barangay Officials
2
17
Contribution
20
1
10
50
3
30
100
2
20
150
2
20
200
2
Mean
P107.00
Ethnic based group
Have
4
8
Contribution
50
2
50
100
1
25
150
1
25
Mean
P112.50
Production group
Have
20
40
Name of Production
group
Farmers Group
16
100
Contribution
50
3
75
100
1
25
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
22
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE
Professional
1
2
association
Name of professional
Association
Ass’n of Registrars
1
100
Participation in
decision-making
Very active
1
100
Level of Trust of Respondents
The level of trust of the respondents is high as indicated in their mean ratings
equivalent to 5 (Table 3). The respondents trusted very much family’s friends and co
tribes that are a member of the same cooperative. They also indicated a level of trust
equivalent to 4 for neighbors. This finding is correlated with the study of Milagrosa ,2007
that the greater the trust between parties, the more effectively they will be able to live
together and cooperate in the future, which will diminish the chances that the old conflict
will re-occur, or a new unmanageable one will develop.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
23
Table 3: Level of trust of respondents
OBJECT OF TRUST
FREQUENCY MEAN
DESCRIPTION
families/ relatives that are a member of 50
4.66
Very much
the same coop
friends that are a member of the same 50
4.46
Very much
coop
co-tribes that are a member of the same 50
4.36
Very much
coop
Neighbors
50
4.00
much
Coop Manager
50
4.30
Very much
Coop Board of Directors
50
4.34
Very much
Coop Bookkeeper/ Secretary
50
4.28
Very much
Coop Treasurer
50
4.32
Very much
Coop Collector
50
4.24
Very much
Coop Audit committee
50
4.30
Very much
Coop Credit committee
50
4.26
Very much
Legend:1-not trust 2-little trust 3-Neutral 4much 5-Very much
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Level of Confidence of Respondents
In times of financial difficulty, the respondents are very much confident (5) that
they can turn to their family, relatives, friends and neighbors rather than money lender,
informal credit, groups, associations, government bank and cooperative and co-members.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
24
Table 4: Level of confidence of respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
Family/ relatives, friends, neighbors
50
4.64
Very confident
Moneylender, Informal credit, groups, 50
3.60
confident
associations
Government, Bank
50
3.52
confident
Cooperatives and co-members
50
4.10
confident
Legend: 1-Not confident 2-little confident 3-Neutral 4-Confident 5-Very confident
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Agreement on Expectations about the Cooperative
The respondents agreed when they were asked the statements “it is generally expected
that people will volunteer or help in coop activities, most coop members contribute to
coop’s activities and members, like you generally have to do favors to coop officers from
time to time to get things done”. On the other hand the respondents answered neutral
(agree nor disagree) that the rules, laws and policies that affect their coop’s economic
well being changes without warning and people who did not volunteer in coop activities
are likely to be criticized/fined.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
25
Table 5: Agreement on expectations about the cooperative
Frequency Mean
Description
It is generally expected that people will 50
3.96
Agree
volunteer or help in coop activities
People who do not volunteer or participate 49
3.28
Neutral
in coop’s activities are likely to be
criticized or fined
Most of the coop members contribute to 49
3.81
Agree
coop’s activities
The rules, laws and policies that affect your 50
3.10
Neutral
coop’s economic well-being change
without warning
Members like you generally have to do 50
3.38
Agree
favors to coop officers from time to time to
get things done
Legend: 1Strongly disagree 2Disagree 3Neutral 4-Agree 5strongly agree
Poverty Perception of Respondents
In terms of poverty perception, the respondents rated their household as 3 meaning
neutral. However, the respondents do belief that their lives will be somewhat better off in
the future while still a member of the cooperative and the respondents were (4) more
confident that they can survive since they became a member of the cooperative.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
26
Table 6: Poverty perception of respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
How would you rate your household ª
50
3.02
Neutral
Thinking about the future while still a 50
3.82
Somewhat
member of the coop, overall do you think
better off
that you and your household will beªª
Being a member of the coop, where would 50
3.18
Neutral
you put yourselfªªª
If there was a crisis, such as poor crops, 50
3.30
Neutral
loss of job, or illness, how would you rate
your household's ability to survive such
crisisªªªª
How confident would you say you that you 50
3.48
More confident
and your household would cope in a crisis
since you became a member of the coopªªªªª
Legend:
1-Very poor 2-Poor 3-Neutral 4-Rich
5-Very rich
ªª1-Much worse off 2-somewhat worse off 3-about the same 4-somewhat better
off 5-Much better off
ªªª1-Totally powerless 2-somewhat powerless 3-Neutral 4-somewhat
powerful 5- Very powerful
ªªªª1-Very unsecured 2-somewhat unsecured 3-Neutral 4-somewhat secure
5-Very secure
ªªªªª1-Much less confident 2-Less confident 3-Same 4-More confident 5-Much
more confident
Participation in Cooperative
Participation in the cooperative shows how the members attend and participate in
their cooperative activities.
Table 7 presents the level of social capital with regards to participation of members
in the cooperative. Out of fifty respondents, almost half (22) of the respondents attend the
coop’s activity once during only their General Assembly, twenty (20) were attending
twice and five respondents attend coop’s activities more than thrice this respondents are
the officers of the different committees. With a total of 48 respondents who attended
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
27
coop’s activity/s in year, this means that almost all of the respondents are attending
coop’s activity/s. In the last six months, only few (40%) of the respondents helped their
co members by standing as their co-maker or guarantor and by lending them money. In
depositing in their coop, only fourteen among the respondents are regular or monthly
saving with mean deposits of P907.14. Meanwhile, almost all of the respondents were
confident in responding “yes” that MVMPC is active which means that the coop provides
well the services offering by it. The reasons for respondent’s perception that the coop is
active are; strong leadership (92%), desire to get ahead economically (50%), strong sense
of Cooperativism (76%), good governance (54%), government support/management
(14%) and Politics/Politicians (14%). By participating in coop’s activity shows that you
are concern with your cooperative. These results collaborate with the study of Putnam
that social capital is created through citizen’s active participation in organization and
groups wherein, participation mainly leads to trust between members in the society.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
28
Table 7: Participation in cooperative of respondents
Frequency
Percent
Times that respondents
attend coop activity in a
year
Once
22
45
Twice
20
41
More than thrice
6
10
Helped someone in coop 20
40
in last six months
if yes, how
6
As co-maker
3
8
Lending money
4
How much money do the 14
respondents deposit in a
month
Mean
P907.14
Reasons for respondents
perception that coop is
active
Strong leadership
46
92
Strong sense of
38
76
Cooperativism
7
14
Politics/Politicians
7
14
Government
25
50
Support/Management
Desire to get ahead 17
economically
34
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
29
Participation of Respondents in Social Activities
Based on the mean rating ranging 3, 4 and 5, the respondent’s participation and
relating with social activities is good and high. This means that the respondents
sometimes visit their co members in their homes and they even have a get together. As to
canao, recreations (such as watching television, sports), clan reunion and bayanihan the
respondents often to participate. Nevertheless, when it comes to community activities like
fiesta and Christmas the respondents always attend.
Table 8: Participation of respondents in social activities
frequency Mean
Description
Visit co-members in their homes
50
3.04
Sometimes
Get together with co-members
50
3.54
Often
participate in our coop’s decision making
49
3.45
Often
Cañao
49
3.59
Often
Community activities (fiesta, Christmas
48
4.50
Always
Recreations
49
3.92
Often
Clan reunion
49
3.84
Often
Bayanihan
49
3.98
Often
Legend: 1--never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
30
Life Satisfaction of Respondents
As to life satisfaction of the respondents, Table 9 indicated that the respondents are
happy and somewhat satisfied with their lives as a whole these days. Moreover, the
respondents were somewhat close when it comes to their togetherness and feeling of
belonging on their coop. likely; the respondents have a moderate impact in making their
coop a better one. Life satisfaction is an overall assessment of feelings and attitudes about
one’s life at a particular point ranging from negative to positive this is defined by Beutell
2006 in his study.
Table 9: Life satisfaction of respondents
Frequency Mean Description
Taking all things together, would you say you areª
50
3.76
Happy
how much impact do you think members like you, 50
3.54
Moderate
can have in making your coop a better oneªª
impact
How would you rate the togetherness or feeling of
50
3.58
Somewhat
belonging in your coopªªª
close
how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these 50
3.60
Somewhat
daysªªªª
satisfied
Legend: ª1-Very unhappy 2-Unhappy 3-Unhappy 4-Happy 5-Very happy
ªª1-No impact 2-little impact 3-Neutral 4-Moderate impact 5-Big impact
ªªª11-Not close at all 2-Not very close 3-Neutral 4-somewhat close 5-Very close
ªªªª1-Very dissatisfied 2-somewhat dissatisfied 3-Neutral 4-somewhat satisfied 5-Very
satisfied
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
31
Support Given and Received by Respondents
Table 10 presents the support given and received by the respondents. With a mean
rating of five (5), the forty respondents reported that they gives are giving a lot of support
to their children. Concerning support they are giving to their parents, all of the
respondents reported that they also gives a lot of support. While the respondent’s gives
just enough support to their other relatives. As to supports received by the respondents,
39 of the respondents received a lot of support coming from their children and everybody
agrees that they also received a lot of support from their parents. And just enough support
received from their other relatives. In short the respondents received what they gave.
Table 10: Support given and received by the respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
Given to Parents
50
4.18
lot of support
Given to children
40
4.40
lot of support
Given to other relatives
50
3.98
just enough
Received from parents
50
4.18
lot of support
Received from children
39
4.31
lot of support
Received from other relatives
50
3.92
just enough
Legend: 1-no support 2-little support 3-neutral 4-just enough 5-lot of support
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
32
How Proud Does the Respondents in the Cooperative
Because the cooperative help their members financially, the coop is successful;
members have cooperation and applying discount to agricultural products to the members
are some of the reasons that made the respondents proud of their coop.
Table 11: How proud does the respondents in the cooperative
Frequency
Valid percent
How proud are you about who you are in the coop you 50
Mean 3.94
belong to
why
3
6
Help in financial status
Members have cooperation
1
2
Because the coop is successful
2
4
There is a discount to an agricultural products to the
1
2
members
Legend: 1-Very ashamed 2-Ashamed 3-neither proud nor ashamed 4-Proud
5-Very proud
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Relationship between Social Capital Variables with the Respondents
This is to determine the relationship of social capital variables with the respondent’s
group and poverty perception of the respondents-their position in household to be
specific.
Relationship between Sociability Variable and Position in Cooperative
With .027 respondents level of significance shows that there is significance
difference of officers and plain members of the cooperative in attending cañao. Officers
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
33
always attend while pain members often to attend. Same with recreations, clan reunion
and bayanihan, officers are found out that they always attend while plain members are
often when they attend with these activities.
Table 12: Social capital vs. position in cooperative
PARTICULAR
MEAN MEAN
Respondents
Officer Description Member Description level of
significance
Visit co-members in 3.33
sometimes 3.00
sometimes
.454
their homes
Get together with co-
members
3.67
often
3.52
often
.738
participate in our 4.00
often
3.37
often
.216
coop’s decision
making
Cañao
4.33
always
3.49
often
.027*
Community
4.50
always
4.50
always
1.00
activities
Recreations
4.50
always
3.84
often
.044*
Clan reunion
4.83
always
3.70
often
.004*
Bayanihan
4.83
always
3.86
often
.008*
Legend: *-not significant
1-- Never 2--seldom 3-sometimes 4- often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Age
Respondents who are younger than thirty years old, where sometimes to attend
cañao, respondents with thirty to fifty tears in age are often to attend while respondents
who are above fifty years in age always attend. This concludes that the older they are the
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
34
more they attend with this kind of activities. This finding collaborates with the study of
Milagros and Slangen, 2007 that older people tend to be more active in organizations
such as religious, cooperatives and local neighborhood gatherings.
Table 13: Sociability variable and age
Age mean
Sociability Variable <31
Descrip- 31-
Descrip- 41-
>50 Descri level
tion
40
tion
50
ption
of
signi
fican
ce
Visit co-members in 3.13
Some-
3.11 Some-
2.60 2.75 Some .683
their homes
times
times
times
Get together with 3.61
often
3.56 often
3.60 3.00 Some .725
co-members
times
Participate in our 3.48
often
3.41 often
3.60 3.23 Some .974
coop’s decision
times
making
Cañao
3.30
Some-
3.82 often
3.40 4.50 always .041
times
Community
4.97
always
4.06 often
3.75 4.50 always .910
activities
Recreations
3.65
often
4.02 often
4.00 4.50 always .089
Clan reunion
3.57
often
4.00 often
3.80 4.75 always .086
Bayanihan
3.60
often
4.29 always
4.00 4.75 always .015
Legend: 1-never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
35
Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Ethno Linguistic
With .037 respondent’s level of significance in visiting co members in their home
implies that there is a significance difference of ethno linguistic in visiting their co
members in their home. Ilokano and Kankana-ey often to visit their co member’s while
Kalanguya’s and Ifugao’s sometimes when they visit their co members in their home.
With this result, dialect spoken by the respondents affects in visiting their co members in
their home. This collaborates with the study of Milagrosa 2007 that dialect spoken is a
major attribute that bonds members of an ethnic group. Furthermore, by the definition of
wikepidia for ethno linguistic that ethno linguistic is the relationship between language
and culture, and the way different ethnic groups perceive the world may give a deeper
understanding why there is a significance difference of ethno linguistic.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
36
Table 14: Ethno Linguistic
Ilokano Descrip- Kanka Descrip- Kalan Ifugao level of
tion
na-ey tion
uya
significan
ce
Visit co- 3.52
often
3.33
Some-
2.67
2.67
.037*
members in
times
their homes
Get together
3.82
often
4.17
often
3.28
3.11
.067
with co-
members
participate in 3.75
often
4.00
often
3.11
3.22
.230
our coop’s
decision
making
Cañao
3.76
often
3.60
often
3.78
3.33
.529
Community
5.00
always
4.00
often
3.75
3.89
.712
activities
Recreations
4.06
often
3.80
often
3.78
4.00
.089
Clan reunion
4.12
often
3.80
often
3.50
4.00
.236
Bayanihan
4.17
often
4.00
often
3.72
4.11
.442
Legend: *-not significance 1-never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Relationship Between Poverty Perception and Position in Household
To poverty perception of respondents whether they are the head or not head of their
household, the difference is not just much or high and it is just significant.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
37
Table 15: Poverty perception and position in household
Household head
level of
Household head not household head
significance
Description Description
How do you rate 2.93
neutral
3.15
neutral
.046
your household
Thinking about the 3.73
Somewhat 3.95
Somewhat
.260
future while still a
better off
better off
member of the coop,
do you think you and
your household will
be
If there is a crisis, 3.20
neutral
3.45
Somewhat
.183
how would you rate
powerful
your households
ability to survive
How confident
3.43
More
3.55
More
.492
would you say that
confident
confident
you and your
household would
cope in a crisis since
you became a coop
member
Being a member of 3.10
sometimes 3.30
neutral
.220
a coop, where would
you put your self
Legend:ª1-very poor 2-poor 3-neutral 4-rich 5-very rich
ªª1-much worse off 2-somewhat worse off 3-about the same 4-somewhat
better off 5- much better off
ªªª1totally powerless 2-powerless 3-Neutral 4-somewhat powerful 5-Very
powerful
ªªªª1-Much less confident 2-less confident 3-Neutral 4-more confident 5-Very
confident
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
38
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The Malabing Multi-Purpose Cooperative (MVMPC) was organized by 48
founding members last November 1989 and was registered at the Development Authority
in March 27, 1991. The cooperative is a specialist in Citrus Production.
Currently, MVMPC is the only cooperative in region 2 that caters services regarding
citrus production. Thus, the uniqueness and success story of this cooperative inspired the
researcher to conduct a study about social capital.
Social capital is how the members trust, participate and link with their co members
and with the other cooperatives.
From the responds of fifty respondents that were chosen by purposive random, most
of them are head or bread winner of their household. Females were bigger in number and
most of the respondents are married. Also, the respondents had a mean age of 34.34 years
old. Moreover, most of the respondents are regular members. Affiliated with different
religious and belong to different ethnic.
On measuring the level of social capital in the cooperative along informal networks,
least of the members were involved ad have an organization or group. Along trust, the
respondents trust if not very much trust their family, relatives and coop employees which
means that their level of trust is high. Moreover, the respondents rated their household as
neutral (neither rich nor poor) but are confident that they can survive since they became a
member of the coop. With regards to the participation of the respondents in the
cooperative, almost they are participating. As to life satisfaction, the respondents
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
39
indicated that they are happy and somewhat satisfied with their lives as a whole these
days.
With regards to relationship of social capital variables between sociability, officers
were more sociable. Respondents who are 41 and above in age were found out to be more
sociable than the younger respondents. On the other hand, the respondents who are head
and not head of their household had just significance or they almost have the same
perception with poverty.
Conclusions
1. Only few of the respondents have and are a member of a group or organization
in their community. These maybes because they are not aware that the group or
organizations exist or they don’t just like to join.
2. Almost all of the respondents attend coop’s activity/s. However, half of the
respondents attend once. This maybe because the cooperative don’t have an activity that
requires the presence of a member or the members are just lazy to attend.
3. In visiting co member in their home, ethno linguistic or different dialect
spoken and different culture practiced by the respondent hinders. Maybe this is because
the respondents don’t understand what their co members are saying or they are not in use
with the practices practiced by the respondents.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
40
Recommendations
1. Community foundations belief, that the levels of social capital in their
community is critical important to the overall health of the community. This is the reason
why members must have to be aware and join a group or organization that is useful in
their community. Because in joining groups or organizations, members could learn a lot
and can impart it with the improvement of the coop they belong and the other way
around. From the learning’s they learned from the coop, they could also impart it in the
group or organization he/she belongs to.
2. Adding coop’s activity in a year that requires member’s appearance is
recommended to the cooperative. So that closeness awareness and feeling of
belongingness in the coop will be better.
3. More Team building activities and recreation activities offer by cooperatives
could help the cooperative to solve the problems regarding ethno linguistic. Through
these activities the members would at least give knowledge and information’s regarding
their co member’s dialect and culture.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
41
LITERATURE CITED
Beutell,N. 2006: Life satisfaction available at http://wf
network.bc.edu/encyclopedia_enty.php?id=3283&area=all accessed on September
15, 2008
Burchardt, T.: Social capital available at http://www.answers.com/topic/social-
capital?hl=social&hl=assets accessed on August 16, 2008
Carter, Carla LynDale: 2002 Reciprocity available at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/reciprocity.htm accessed on July 26, 2008
Carroll, Thomas F.: 2001 Social capital, Local capacity building and Poverty reduction
available at http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Social_Capital/chapter01.pdf
accessed on September o3, 2008
Claridge, Tristan: 2004 Social Capital available at http://www.gnudung.com accessed on July
26, 2008
Co-operatives secretariat Canada, 2004. Cooperatives and the Social Economy.
http://www.agr.gc.ca/rcs-src/coop/pub/pdf/soc_e.pdf . Accessed on September 15,
2008
Doreian P. and Snijders (editor): Social networks available at
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/505596/description
accessed on November 10, 2008
Fukuyam, Francis 1999: Social Capital and civic society available at
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/seminar/1999/reforms/fukuyama.htm accessed
on July 26, 2008
Halpern, David:2005 Book summary of social capital by David Halpern accessed at
http://www.crinfo.org/booksummary/10674
Hampel-Milagrosa, Aimée and Slangen Luis H. G. 2007 The social capital of indigenous
agricultural communities in Benguet, northern Philippines : socio-cultural
implications and consequences to local vegetable trade,
Garson, David G.2006:Social Capital Theory accessed at
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/social capital.htm accessed on July 26,
2008
Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce 2005: Common goal available at
http://www.commongoalindy.org
Milagrosa, A 2007: Institutional Economic Analysis of Vegetable Production and
Marketing in Northern Philippines: Social Capital, Institutions and Governance
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
42
Narayan,Deepa:1999 Bonds and bridges social capital and poverty accessed at
http://www.psigeorgia.org/pregp/files/social%20capital.pdf
Smith, Mark K. social Capital:2008 accessed at http://www.infed. org/biblio/social
_capital.htm accessed on July 26, 2008
Taylof, Funk and Clark 2008:
Putnam, Robert: 1995 Bowling alone accessed at htt Reed, Lora: Service leanings as a
means of learning disaster preparedness partnerships and enhancing management
education accessed at http://aabss.org/journal2007/AABSS2007Article1Reed.pdf.
Webster dictionary, 1996
Weissmann, Mikael 2008: Informal networks as a conflict preventive mechanism
Accessed at www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/beijing/CPinNEA_ch5.pdf
accessed on March 19, 2009
Yago, A. 2000:Live the Malabing Way
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
43
APPENDIX A
Survey Questionnaire
Questionnaire No.________
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Name of cooperative:
________________________Location:___________________________
2. Is the respondent the head of household? ______ Yes ______ No
3. Sex of respondent: ______Male _______Female
4. Age of respondent: _______
5. Civil status: ______single; ________married; _________widow/er;
6. How long has respondent been a member of this cooperative? ____
7. Position in cooperative: _____ Officer _____ Member
8. Membership: _____ Associate member _____ Regular member
B. GROUPS/ NETWORKS AND PARTICIPATION
9. Please indicate if you belong to any of the following groups by answering the
appropriate columns
Group
Name of
How much
How actively do you
Organization
money do
participate in this
or Group
you
group’s decision-
contribute to
making
this group in 1 = Leader
a month
2 = Very active
3 = Somewhat active
4 = Does not
participate in decision-
making
Religious or spiritual group;
specify
Cultural, social, emotional/support
group such as BIBAK, senior
citizen; specify
Sports groups; specify
Basic services groups such as
Barangay Health Worker,
Mothers’ classes, Tanod; specify
Ethnic based groups such as tribe,
indigenous, community
organizations; specify
Production group such as farmers,
vendors groups; specify
Political party (Lakas NUCD,
Anakpawis, Bayan muna)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
44
Professional association (such as
Rotary, Lion’s , Chamber of
Commerce; specify
Other Cooperatives, specify name
Sociability
10. Please rate your participation in the following activities?
Never
2
3
4.
5. Always
(1)
I do the following informal activities
a. Visit co-members in their
homes
b. Get together with co-
members (for recreation,
parties etc.)
I participate in our coop’s decision
making
I attend the following activities
a. Cañao
b. Community activities
(fiesta, Christmas)
c. Recreations (sports fest,
film showing, liga)
d. Clan reunion
e. Bayanihan
Participation in Cooperative
11. On average, how much money do you deposit in your coop in a month?
_______________________________
12. On average, how often do you participate in your coop’s activities in a year?
____(Once); _____(Twice);______(More than twice) Specify ____________
13. Have you helped someone of the coop members in the last 6 months? ____ Yes
____ No: If yes how?___________________
14. Please indicate how you rate your coop whether active or inactive. Rank the reasons
why you chose your specific answer (1 is the most important and 5 is the least
important)
I. ACTIVE (serves 50% or more of
II. INACTIVE ( serves less than 50% of the
the members)
members)
____ a. Strong leadership
____ a. No strong leadership
____ b. Strong sense of cooperativism ____ b. no sense f cooperativism
____ c. Politics/politicians
____ c. Mismanagement of coop
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
45
____ d. Government support/
____ d. Conflict between groups
management
____ e. Desire to get ahead
____ e. Coop members think only about
economically
themselves (selfish)
____ f. Good governance
____ f. No government support/connections
____ g. Coop members’ delinquency on loans
____ i. Lack resources
C. TRUST
15. How much do you trust the following?
Not trust
Little
Neutral
Much
Very
(1)
trust (2)
(3)
(4)
much (5)
a. families/ relatives that are a
member of the same coop
b. friends that are a member of
the same coop
c. co-tribes that are a member of
the same coop
d. Neighbors
e. Coop employees
e1. Manager
e2. Board of Directors
e3. Bookkeeper/ Secretary
e4. Treasurer
e5. Collector
e6. Audit committee
e7. Credit committee
16. In times of financial difficulty, how confident are you that you can turn to these
different groups for a help?
Not
Little
Neutral Confid
Very
confident confide
(3)
ent (4) confident
(1)
nt (2)
(5)
Family/ relatives, friends,
neighbors,
Moneylender, Informal credit,
groups, associations
Government, Bank
Cooperatives and co-members
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
46
How much do you agree or disagree with each one of the statement.
Strongly
Disagr Neut Agre Strong
disagree (1) ee (2)
ral e (4)
ly
(3)
agree
(5)
In your coop, it is generally expected that
people will volunteer or help in coop
activities
People who do not volunteer or participate
in coop’s activities are likely to be
criticized or fined
Most of the coop members contribute to
coop’s activities
The rules, laws and policies that affect
your coop’s economic well-being change
without warning
Members like you generally have to do
favors to coop officers from time to time
to get things done
D. POVERTY PERCEPTION
18. How would you rate your household?
____ Very poor (1)
____ Poor (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ rich (4)
____ Very rich (5)
19. Thinking about the future while still a member of the coop, overall do you think that
you and your household will be…
____ Much worse off (1)
____ Somewhat worse off (2)
____ About the same (3)
____ Somewhat better off (4)
____ Much better off (5)
20. Being a member of the coop, where would you put yourself?
____ Totally powerless (1)
____ Somewhat powerless (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat powerful (4)
____ Very powerful (5)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
47
21. If there was a crisis, such as poor crops, loss of job, or illness, how would you rate
your household's ability to survive such crisis?
____ Very unsecured (1)
____ Somewhat unsecured (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat secure (4)
____ Very secure (5)
22. How confident would you say you that you and your household would cope in a crisis
since you became a member of the coop?
____ Much less confident (1)
____ Less confident (2)
____ Same (3)
____ More confident (4)
____ Much more confident (5)
E. LIFE SATISFACTION (Please check the appropriate number corresponding to your
answer)
23. Taking all things together, would you say you are…
____ Very unhappy (1)
____ Unhappy (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Happy (4)
____ Very happy (5)
24. Overall, how much impact do you think members like you, can have in making your
coop a better one?
____ No impact (1)
____ Little impact (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Moderate impact (4)
____ Big impact (5)
25. How would you rate the togetherness or feeling of belonging in your coop?
____ Not close at all (1)
____ Not very close (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat close (4)
____ Very close (5)
26. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?
____ Very dissatisfied (1)
____ Somewhat dissatisfied (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat satisfied (4)
____ Very satisfied(5)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
48
27. How would you rate the support you are giving to parents, children or other relatives,
either living with you or living elsewhere since you became a member of the coop?
No support Little support Neutral
Just enough
Lot of
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
support
(5)
Parents
Children
Other relatives
28. How would you rate the support you are getting from parents, children or other
relatives, either living with you or living elsewhere since you became a member of the
coop?
No support
Little support Neutral
Just enough
Lot of
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
support (5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
29. People have different opinions about the most important problems that need to be
fixed to make the coop better. In your opinion, what is the BIGGEST problem facing
you, rank as 1? What is the SECOND biggest problem, rank as 2? What is the THIRD
biggest problem, rank as 3,
a. Management
b. Coop leaders
c. Members
___ Incompetence
___ Corruption
___ Negative values
___ Lack of Skills
___ Lack of leadership
like_______
___ Others _________
capability
___ Lack of cooperation
___ Negative values like
___ Others
_______
_________________
30. How proud are you about who you are in the coop you belong to?
Reason (s)
____ Very ashamed ________________________________
____ Ashamed
____________________________
____ Neither proud nor ashamed
____ Proud
____ Very proud
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
49
F. INFORMATION SOURCES
31. What are your sources of information? Kindly check
Yes
Source not What information do you get?
available
a. Newspapers, journals, magazines
b. Radio
c. Television
d. Clubs/groups/ association
e. With in vil age/neighborhood Sources
f . Outside Vil age
32. How proud are you about who you are in the coop you belong to?
____ Very ashamed
____ Ashamed
____ Neither proud nor ashamed
____ Proud
____ Very proud
G. DEMOGRAPHIC
33. How much formal schooling have you had?
____ None
____ Primary
____ Elementary
____ Secondary
____ University/ College or more
____ Vocational/technical
34. How many of the following live in your household?
a. Adult men (16 and over): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
b. Adult women (16 and over) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
c. Boys (15 and under) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
d. Girls (15 and under) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
e. Total Members: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
35. What is your occupation?
____ Housewife
____ Student
____ Self-employed: please specify _______________
____ Others, Please specify: _________________
36. What language/s and dialect/s do you speak?
____ English
____ Tagalog
____ Iloko
____ Ibaloi
____ Kankanaey
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
50
____ Kalanguya
____ others, specify___________________
37. What is your ethno-linguistic group?
____ Ilokano ____ Ibaloi ____ others,
specify______________
____ Kakanaey ____ Kalanguya
38. What is your religious affiliation?
____ Catholic
____ Islam
____ Born Again others, specify ______________
____ Iglesia ni Cristo
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
BALLAGAN, TRACY P. APRIL 2009. Social capital Among Members of
Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya.
Adviser: Dr. Marie Klondy T. Dagupen
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to find out the demographic profile of the respondents,
to determine the level of social capital among members of Malabing Valley Multi-
Purpose Cooperative along informal networks, trust, poverty perception, participation in
the cooperative and participation within social activities, and life satisfaction, to
determine the relationship of social capital variable with relationship between sociability
variable and position in cooperative, relationship between sociability variable and age,
relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group and relationship
between poverty perception and position in household and to suggested specific actions
to improve social capital in the cooperative.
The study made use of questionnaire as the main instrument for gathering data.
There were 50 respondents chosen by random. The survey was done on January 10, 2009.
Social capital components were measured using a five point Likert Scale.
Frequencies and means were obtains using the Soft ware Statistical Package for the
Social sciences (SPSS) and One-way Analysis of Variance was used to determine the
relationships between the respondents profile with social capital variables.
Results from this study revealed that only few of the respondents have and
where a member of a group or organization in their community but then when it comes to
their cooperative, the respondents believe and proud of with their coop. However in
visiting co members in their home, ethno linguistic affect.
Recommendations to these identified problems were to encourage the members of
the community to be aware and join groups and conducting more team building and
recreation activities by the different group of the cooperative.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography.………………………………………………………………
i
Abstract………… …………………………………………………………
i
Table of contents.………………………………………………….……….
iii
INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………
1
Background of the Study…………………………………………….
1
Statement of the Problem……………………………………...…….
3
Objective of the Study……………………………………………….
4
Importance of the Study……………………………………….……
5
REVIEW OF LITERATURE………………………………………………
5
Definition of Social Capital………………………………………….
6
Benefits Derived from Social Capital…………………………..……
7
Forms of Social Capital………………………………………...…..
8
Component of Social Capital…………………………………..……
10
Indicators of Social Capital…………………………………….……
11
Definition of Terms…………………………………………………
12
METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………
13
Locale and Time of Study………………………………………..
13
Respondents of the Study…………………………………………
13
Data Collection………………………………………………….…
13
iii
Data Analysis……………………………………………………..
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS…………………………………….....
15
Demographic Profile of the Respondents…………………………
15
Level of Social Capital…………………………………………….
18
Level of Trust of Respondents…………………………………...
21
Poverty Perception of Respondents……………………………..…
24
Participation in Cooperative…………………………………….…
25
Life Satisfaction of Respondents………………………………...…
28
Relationship between Social Capital
Variable with the Respondents……………………………………..
31
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………
38
Summary……………………………………………………………
38
Conclusion………………………………………………………….
39
Recommendation……………………………………………………
40
LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………….……..
42
APPENDIX ……………………………………………….………………
44
iv
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Malabing Valley is found in the northeastern part of the Kasibu Municipality of
Nueva Vizcaya province, Philippines. This place is also known as the number one
producer of citrus fruits of different varieties making Nueva Vizcaya “The Citrus Bowl of
the Philippines”. Hardship of life in Malabing Valley is the driver for the spirit of
volunteerism and cooperativism among the valley residents. The Malabing Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative (MVMPC) was conceived through the leadership of Mr.
Alfonso Namujhe, who envisioned transforming the whole community to a modernized
agricultural area. Namujhe together with a group of young professionals from the
component barangay of Malabing Valley met to explore possible actions they can take to
accelerate the improvement of the socio-economic condition of their communities. They
perceived the need to form a farmers association, which would serve as a development
catalyst in the valley. However, when this group had the opportunity to attend a Trainers’
Training for Cooperatives conducted by the Agricultural Training Institute of the
Department of Agriculture in San Mateo, Isabela Province in September 1989, the idea of
forming a cooperative instead of an association came up. The cooperative was formally
organized in November 1989 with 48 founding members and a paid up share capital of
P16, 300. It was formally registered with the Bureau of Cooperatives on March 08, 1990
and confirmed by the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) on March 27, 1991.
The Cooperative was renamed Malabing Valley Multipurpose on November 19,
1997 when the CDA formally registered its articles of cooperation. Since then, the
cooperative’s area of business operations expanded from Malabing to the other parts of
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
2
Luzon particularly Baguio City, Tarlac, Pampanga and Metro Manila. Its new members
are also from the provinces of Isabela, Quirino and other municipalities of Nueva
Vizcaya. Presently, the cooperative has more than 500 members with total paid up share
capital of P2, 385,581 and assets totaling P27, 743,500. The cooperative, a known
specialist in citrus production is now facing greater challenges in its expanded services
from production, transporting, warehousing, processing and marketing products in
national and global market. The cooperative helps also in advocacy against the
environmental destruction in the valley and the whole municipality of Kasibu, Nueva
Vizcaya (Live the Malabing Way, 2000).
The success story of the Malabing Valley Multipurpose Cooperative inspired this
research on social capital to be conducted in the cooperative. Putnam (1995) indicated
that in an organization or in a community, social capital plays an important role because
it allows the members to resolve their problems easily by doing their own responsibility.
It also greases the wheels that allow communities to advance smoothly and improves an
organization by widening the awareness of members in many ways which their fates are
linked.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
3
Statement of Problem
This study sought to answers to the following questions:
1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents?
2. What are the levels of social capital among members of Malabing Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative along:
a. Informal Network
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
· Cooperative
· Social
e. Life Satisfaction?
3. What is the relationship of social capital variables with:
a. Relationship between sociability variable and position in coop
b. Relationship between sociability variable and age
c. Relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group
d. Relationship between poverty perception and position in household
4. What are the suggested specific actions to improve social capital for the
Cooperative?
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
4
Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study were to:
1. Determine the demographic profile of the respondents.
2. Determine the level of Social Capital among the members MALABING Valley
Multipurpose Cooperative along:
a. Informal Networks
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
· cooperative
· social
e. Life Satisfaction
3. Determine the relationship of the social capital variables with:
a. Relationship between sociability variable and position in coop
b. Relationship between sociability variable and age
c. Relationship between sociability variable and ethno linguistic group
d. Relationship between poverty perception and position in household
4. Suggest specific actions to improve social capital for the cooperative
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
5
Importance of the Study
The result of the study would provide information regarding the importance of
social capital to cooperatives, especially Malabing Valley Multipurpose, which will serve
as guide to members in knowing their status in terms of social capital. The findings of
this study will contribute/supply information on the cooperatives level of social capital
among the members moreover, this study will determine also the relationships of the
social capital variables like relationship between Sociability variable and position in
coop, relationship between Sociability variable and age, relationship between Sociability
variable and ethno linguistic and relationship between poverty perception and position in
household
This study would also serve as a source of information for further research on
related study.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Definitions of Social Capital
Social relationships help people to get along with each other and act more
effectively than they could as isolated individuals. In this view, patterns of social
organizations, especially trust, mutuality, and reciprocity, are seen as important
resources, which can result in benefit to individuals, groups and society (Carroll 2001).
By this process social capital takes place. Wherein, social capital is defined social capital
as a “Features of the social organizations such as networks, norms, and trust that facilitate
action and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1995) He also added that social
capital is created through citizen’s active participation in organizations and groups
wherein, participation mainly leads to trust between the members in the society.
In an organizations and cooperatives, trust, reciprocity and social networks are the
basic needs in order for them to grasp the sweetness of success. Cooperatives promote
citizen engagement, social cohesion and trust by providing ordinary citizens a chance to
influence the decisions that affect their lives and allows the members to resolve their
problems easily by doing their own responsibility in the cooperative (Co-operatives
Secretariat Canada, 2004) Social capital also greases the wheels that allow communities
to advance smoothly. Also, social capital improves the cooperative by widening the
awareness in many ways which their fates are linked. People who have active and
trusting connections to others develop or maintain character traits that are good for the
rest of society. Joiners become more tolerant, less cynical, and more empathetic to the
misfortunes of others. When people lack connection to others, they are unable to test the
veracity of their own views, whether in the give or take of casual conversation or in more
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
7
formal deliberation. Without such an opportunity, people are more likely to be swayed by
their worse impulses. In addition, because social capital exists in the linkages between
such individuals, we could also imagine stepping back and forming a birds-eye view of
the entire network that emerges as an aggregate of these interlinked actors. This
alternative approach leads us to define social capital from a different angle – that of the
collective ( Claridge, 2001)
Benefits Derived from Social Capital
In high social capital areas, public spaces are cleaner, people are friendlier and the
streets are safer. There appears to be a strong relationship between the possession of
social capital and better health. Social capital also can help to mitigate or soften the
insidious or deceitful effects of socio economic disadvantages. Furthermore, social
capital may result to better knowledge sharing due to established trust relationships,
common frames of reference and shared goals. Due to high level of trust and cooperative
spirit (both within the organization and between the organization and its customers and
partnership) transaction cost will be lower. Social capital produces severance cost hiring
and training expenses, lower turnover rates, avoiding discontinuities associated with
frequent personnel changes, and maintaining valuable organizational knowledge. And
lastly, due to organizational stability and shared understanding results to a greater
coherence of action (Smith ,2008)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
8
Forms of Social Capital
One variable that affects social capital is trust where in some sees trust as a source
of social capital Trust is defined as a belief in the honesty, integrity and reliability of
others, “a Faith in people” (Taylor, Funk and Clark, 2007). Also trust is placing
confidence in others so that they will be supportive and reinforcing of you, even if you let
down your "strong'' mask and show your weaknesses. Trust also forms the basis for
social interactions, especially reciprocity and the agreements for future actions essential
for planning and working together. It is also important for the establishment of normal
relationships. The greater the trust between parties, the more effectively they will be able
to live together and cooperate in the future, which will diminish the chances that the old
conflict will re-occur, or a new unmanageable one will develop. Also, individuals who
have trust and cooperation among themselves are harnessed better and are more
productive. As with social capital, trust has to be recurrently renewed so that it can be
sustained between trustees or trustor (Milagrosa ,2007).
Another important form of social capital is reciprocity. Wherein reciprocity is
defines as a state of relationships in which there is mutual action, influence, giving and
taking, correspondence, between, two parties (Carter, 2002). Trust is the integral part of
this norm because a person who reciprocates one good action for another becomes
trustworthy. This is important because on a basic level, the decision to cooperate or not
depends on whether the other agent is reliable. On a higher level, if people within a
community reciprocate good deeds for each other, it is a general indication that a
considerable percentage of these citizens are trustworthy.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
9
On the other hand, social networks are necessary precondition for reciprocity
(Milagrosa ,2007) Social network is a social structure made of nodes (which are generally
individuals or organizations) that are tied by one or more specific types of
interdependency, such as values, visions, ideas, financial exchange, friendship, kinship,
dislike, conflict or trade.
There are a lot of variables that may affect the components of socials capital
informal networks, trust, life satisfaction, poverty perception and participation can be one
of the variables that can affect the components of social capital.
Informal network is defined as the social networks of individuals and/or
collectives without formal structures, linked by one or more social relationships such as
kinship and friendship. (Weissmann, 2008)
Trust is defined as to have faith in, to believe. (Webster dictionary, 1996). There are
two type of trust the core trust and the institutional trust. Wherein, Core trust is highly
towards trust, within the immediate environment particularly trust of his family,
neighbors, farmers, the church and respondents, own feelings of trust worthiness. While
the institutional trust is the attitudes related to trust in the formal institutional
environment with emphasis on the legal system, police and municipal government.
Positive significant relationship between municipal police and this trust shows that
individuals who have high scores in trusting the municipal police, also tends to have rate
municipal trust highly (Smith, 2008).
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
10
Participation also affects. Participation is defined as an umbrella term including
different means for the public to directly participate in political, economic, management
or other social decisions. Ideally, each actor would have a say in decisions directly
proportional to the degree that particular decision affects him or her (Wikipedia 2009).
Poverty perception is one factor that can affect social capital. Two factors loaded
heavily for these components are poverty because of laziness and poverty because of lack
of life opportunities (Milagrosa ,2007)
One more factor is the common goals. This factor measures the community
aspirations (Milagrosa ,2007) it is also well-defined set of initiatives and interventions
aimed (Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce ,2005)
And Lastly, Life satisfaction- Life satisfaction is an overall assessment of feelings
and attitudes about one’s life at a particular point in time ranging from negative to
positive. (Beutell ,2006). Individual who fined equal treatment from the government
important would load highly on the life satisfaction component (Milagrosa ,2007)
Component of Social Capital
There are two components of social capital the structural social capital and cognitive
components. The structural social capital is tangible and deals with formal institutions.
This also includes membership in formal networks, particularly in local organizations like
the church and local government. While cognitive social capital is perceived as
embedded within the people thus, intangible. This is form of trust, local ethics, tradition
and morals ( Milagrosa 2007). Furthermore, cognitive is based on mental processes and
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
11
psychology in the domain of idea and includes particularly norms, values, attitudes and
beliefs
Indicators of Social Capital
Community foundations belief, that the levels of social capital in their community is
critical important to the overall health of the community. Community foundations are
social capital builder, committed to working with all groups in their community to deploy
experimental solutions to build their community. So, social capital enables communities
to emulate others who are strong in specific areas. The more the level of participation in
voluntary associations, the greater the social capital. The more the networking, the
greater the social capital. The more the mentoring and mutual support in an organization,
the greater its social capital. The greater the prevalence of passive media (ex.,
television), the less the social capital. The greater the social capital, the more prevalent
the norm of reciprocity (bargaining, compromise, pluralism). The greater the social
capital, the higher the priority of the norm of equality. The greater the social capital, the
greater the confidence in government (and other institutions). The greater the social
capital, the easier to mobilize support for problem solutions. And the greater the social
capital, the higher the percentage of problem-solving outside the governmental sector.
The less the social capital, the greater the need to rely on authoritative controls are the
following indicators of social capital( Garson 2006).
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
12
Definition of Terms
The following are the technical terms used in the study
1. Social capital. Social capital refers to the social relationship of a member in an
organization or in a community such as trust, reciprocity, and social networks that guides
them to achieve their common goals.
2. Cooperative. Autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their
common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned
and democratically-controlled enterprise.
3. Multipurpose cooperative. It is form of two or more kinds of cooperative.
4. Members. These are the group of person who are a part of one organization
5. Trust. Belief in the honesty, integrity and reliability of others: “a Faith in
people”.
6. Informal networks. This shows the strong positive correlation of getting a long
component with people in the community.
7. Common goals. Set of initiatives and interventions aimed
8. Life satisfaction. Is an overall assessment of feelings and attitudes about one’s life
at a particular point in time ranging from negative to positive.
9.Interpersonal trust- It is the feeling that you can depend upon the other person that
meet your expectations when you are not able to control or monitor the other’s behavior.
9. Ethno linguistic. Studies the relationship between language and culture, and
the way different ethnic groups perceive the world
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
13
METHODOLOGY
Iocale and Time of the Study
The study was conducted among the members of Malabing Valley Multipurpose
Cooperative in Malabing Valley, Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya from December 2008 to
January 2009.
Respondents of the Study
There were 50 respondents composed of the Officers, management team and
members, who were chosen through purposive random sampling based on the year since
they became a member of the said cooperative.
Data Collection
The data in this study was collected through the use of questionnaires distributed
to the respondents. The questionnaire contained sections pertaining to demographic
profile of the respondents; level of social capital among the members along informal
network, trust, poverty perception, common goals and life satisfaction and also includes
social capital variables such as age, educational attainment, sex, ethnicity, number of
years of membership in the cooperative; and other related variables.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
14
Data Analysis
Social capital components were measured using a five point Likert Scale. For
example; participation in the cooperative and community activities used of a scale 1 to 5,
where 1 represents never and the other extreme point represents always. For trust, 1-
represents not trust and 5- trust very much. Frequencies and means were obtained using a
Software Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and One-way Analysis of
Variance was used to determine the relationships between the respondents profile with
social capital variables.
The mean range used in the study are: 1-1.74 equal to 1, 1.75-2.54 equal to 2,
2.55-3.34 equal to 3, 3.35-4.14 equal to 4 and 4.15-5 equal to 5. Also the level of
significance in this study is <.05
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Demographic Profile of Respondents
Thirty of the 50 respondents were household heads, 29 (50%) are females and 21
(42%) are males. Most of themes were married and the rest, 24 % and 2% were single
and widow, respectively. The mean age of the respondents was 34.34 years.
As to membership in the cooperative 90% of the respondents were regular and 88%
were plain members. Six (12%) of the respondents were officers. Almost half of the
respondents finished a degree and 14 of them are working in the cooperative. Also most
of the respondents can speak in Ilokano and coming from Kalanguya group were larger
in number.
Table 1: Profile of Respondents
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Household head
Household head
30
60
Not household head
20
40
TOTAL
50
100
Sex
Male
21
Female
42
29
58
TOTAL
50
100
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
16
Table 1 Continued…..
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Civil Status
24
Single
12
72
Married
37
2
Widower
1
TOTAL
50
100
Age
mean:34.34 years old
<31
23
46
31-40
18
36
41-50
5
10
50>
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
Position in Coop
Officer
6
12
Member
44
88
TOTAL
50
100
Membership in Coop
Associate
5
10
Regular
45
90
Educational Attainment
Elementary
7
14
Secondary
20
41
University/college
21
43
Vocational/technical
1
2
TOTAL
50
100
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
17
Table 1 continued….
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Occupation
9
18
Housewife
7
14
Self employed
6
12
Government employee
3
6
Teacher
1
2
Engineer
10
20
Farmer
14
28
Coop employee
TOTAL
50
100
Dialects Spoken
English
33
66
Tagalog
42
84
Ibaloi
3
6
Kalanguya
25
50
Iloko
43
86
Kankanaey
8
16
Tuwali/Ifugao
9
1
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
18
Table 1 Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Ethno-linguistic group
17
34
Ilokano
2
4
Kankanaey
18
36
Kalanguya
1
2
Kankanaey
3
6
Ibaloi
9
18
Ifugao
TOTAL
50
100
Level of Social Capital
Groups/Networks/Participation
Table 2 is the groups, networks that the respondents are with or a member with. In
terms of religious, few of the respondents were involved with a mean contribution of
P177.27 in a month. BIBAK and Senior Citizen are the cultural, social that the least of
the respondents are involved with a mean contribution of P100.00 per month. From the
sports group, only two of the respondents are involved and a member of Barangay sports
League with a mean contribution of P20.00 a month. In basic service group, respondent’s
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
19
increases (13 respondents) compare to cultural, social and sports group. Meanwhile,
respondents who are a member of Red Cross with four respondents have the high
percentage; Barangay Health Worker and Tanod are the next with the same percentage
with a three respondents who are a member in each and Barangay officials as the last
with a mean contribution of P107.00 a month. Above religious, cultural/social, sports
group, basic services groups and ethnic based group, production group had the highest
percent and respondents and from these twenty respondents are sixteen are farmers.
Table 2: Groups/Networks/Participation
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Religious
Belong to religious 16
32
grp
Contribution
2
18
50
3
27
100
1
9
150
3
27
200
1
9
300
1
9
500
P177.27
Mean
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
20
Table 2 continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Cultural, social
Belong to
7
14
Cultural, social
Name of cultural,
social group
BIBAK
4
67
Senior Citizen
4
33
Contribution
100
2
100
Mean
P100.00
Sports group
2
4
Name of sport group
Barangay sports
2
100
league
Contribution
20
1
P20.00
Mean
Basic services group
Have Basic service 13
26
grp
Name of basic
3
25
services group
Barangay Health
4
worker
33
Red cross
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
21
Table 2 Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENT
Tanod
3
25
Barangay Officials
2
17
Contribution
20
1
10
50
3
30
100
2
20
150
2
20
200
2
Mean
P107.00
Ethnic based group
Have
4
8
Contribution
50
2
50
100
1
25
150
1
25
Mean
P112.50
Production group
Have
20
40
Name of Production
group
Farmers Group
16
100
Contribution
50
3
75
100
1
25
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
22
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE
Professional
1
2
association
Name of professional
Association
Ass’n of Registrars
1
100
Participation in
decision-making
Very active
1
100
Level of Trust of Respondents
The level of trust of the respondents is high as indicated in their mean ratings
equivalent to 5 (Table 3). The respondents trusted very much family’s friends and co
tribes that are a member of the same cooperative. They also indicated a level of trust
equivalent to 4 for neighbors. This finding is correlated with the study of Milagrosa ,2007
that the greater the trust between parties, the more effectively they will be able to live
together and cooperate in the future, which will diminish the chances that the old conflict
will re-occur, or a new unmanageable one will develop.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
23
Table 3: Level of trust of respondents
OBJECT OF TRUST
FREQUENCY MEAN
DESCRIPTION
families/ relatives that are a member of 50
4.66
Very much
the same coop
friends that are a member of the same 50
4.46
Very much
coop
co-tribes that are a member of the same 50
4.36
Very much
coop
Neighbors
50
4.00
much
Coop Manager
50
4.30
Very much
Coop Board of Directors
50
4.34
Very much
Coop Bookkeeper/ Secretary
50
4.28
Very much
Coop Treasurer
50
4.32
Very much
Coop Collector
50
4.24
Very much
Coop Audit committee
50
4.30
Very much
Coop Credit committee
50
4.26
Very much
Legend:1-not trust 2-little trust 3-Neutral 4much 5-Very much
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Level of Confidence of Respondents
In times of financial difficulty, the respondents are very much confident (5) that
they can turn to their family, relatives, friends and neighbors rather than money lender,
informal credit, groups, associations, government bank and cooperative and co-members.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
24
Table 4: Level of confidence of respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
Family/ relatives, friends, neighbors
50
4.64
Very confident
Moneylender, Informal credit, groups, 50
3.60
confident
associations
Government, Bank
50
3.52
confident
Cooperatives and co-members
50
4.10
confident
Legend: 1-Not confident 2-little confident 3-Neutral 4-Confident 5-Very confident
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Agreement on Expectations about the Cooperative
The respondents agreed when they were asked the statements “it is generally expected
that people will volunteer or help in coop activities, most coop members contribute to
coop’s activities and members, like you generally have to do favors to coop officers from
time to time to get things done”. On the other hand the respondents answered neutral
(agree nor disagree) that the rules, laws and policies that affect their coop’s economic
well being changes without warning and people who did not volunteer in coop activities
are likely to be criticized/fined.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
25
Table 5: Agreement on expectations about the cooperative
Frequency Mean
Description
It is generally expected that people will 50
3.96
Agree
volunteer or help in coop activities
People who do not volunteer or participate 49
3.28
Neutral
in coop’s activities are likely to be
criticized or fined
Most of the coop members contribute to 49
3.81
Agree
coop’s activities
The rules, laws and policies that affect your 50
3.10
Neutral
coop’s economic well-being change
without warning
Members like you generally have to do 50
3.38
Agree
favors to coop officers from time to time to
get things done
Legend: 1Strongly disagree 2Disagree 3Neutral 4-Agree 5strongly agree
Poverty Perception of Respondents
In terms of poverty perception, the respondents rated their household as 3 meaning
neutral. However, the respondents do belief that their lives will be somewhat better off in
the future while still a member of the cooperative and the respondents were (4) more
confident that they can survive since they became a member of the cooperative.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
26
Table 6: Poverty perception of respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
How would you rate your household ª
50
3.02
Neutral
Thinking about the future while still a 50
3.82
Somewhat
member of the coop, overall do you think
better off
that you and your household will beªª
Being a member of the coop, where would 50
3.18
Neutral
you put yourselfªªª
If there was a crisis, such as poor crops, 50
3.30
Neutral
loss of job, or illness, how would you rate
your household's ability to survive such
crisisªªªª
How confident would you say you that you 50
3.48
More confident
and your household would cope in a crisis
since you became a member of the coopªªªªª
Legend:
1-Very poor 2-Poor 3-Neutral 4-Rich
5-Very rich
ªª1-Much worse off 2-somewhat worse off 3-about the same 4-somewhat better
off 5-Much better off
ªªª1-Totally powerless 2-somewhat powerless 3-Neutral 4-somewhat
powerful 5- Very powerful
ªªªª1-Very unsecured 2-somewhat unsecured 3-Neutral 4-somewhat secure
5-Very secure
ªªªªª1-Much less confident 2-Less confident 3-Same 4-More confident 5-Much
more confident
Participation in Cooperative
Participation in the cooperative shows how the members attend and participate in
their cooperative activities.
Table 7 presents the level of social capital with regards to participation of members
in the cooperative. Out of fifty respondents, almost half (22) of the respondents attend the
coop’s activity once during only their General Assembly, twenty (20) were attending
twice and five respondents attend coop’s activities more than thrice this respondents are
the officers of the different committees. With a total of 48 respondents who attended
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
27
coop’s activity/s in year, this means that almost all of the respondents are attending
coop’s activity/s. In the last six months, only few (40%) of the respondents helped their
co members by standing as their co-maker or guarantor and by lending them money. In
depositing in their coop, only fourteen among the respondents are regular or monthly
saving with mean deposits of P907.14. Meanwhile, almost all of the respondents were
confident in responding “yes” that MVMPC is active which means that the coop provides
well the services offering by it. The reasons for respondent’s perception that the coop is
active are; strong leadership (92%), desire to get ahead economically (50%), strong sense
of Cooperativism (76%), good governance (54%), government support/management
(14%) and Politics/Politicians (14%). By participating in coop’s activity shows that you
are concern with your cooperative. These results collaborate with the study of Putnam
that social capital is created through citizen’s active participation in organization and
groups wherein, participation mainly leads to trust between members in the society.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
28
Table 7: Participation in cooperative of respondents
Frequency
Percent
Times that respondents
attend coop activity in a
year
Once
22
45
Twice
20
41
More than thrice
6
10
Helped someone in coop 20
40
in last six months
if yes, how
6
As co-maker
3
8
Lending money
4
How much money do the 14
respondents deposit in a
month
Mean
P907.14
Reasons for respondents
perception that coop is
active
Strong leadership
46
92
Strong sense of
38
76
Cooperativism
7
14
Politics/Politicians
7
14
Government
25
50
Support/Management
Desire to get ahead 17
economically
34
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
29
Participation of Respondents in Social Activities
Based on the mean rating ranging 3, 4 and 5, the respondent’s participation and
relating with social activities is good and high. This means that the respondents
sometimes visit their co members in their homes and they even have a get together. As to
canao, recreations (such as watching television, sports), clan reunion and bayanihan the
respondents often to participate. Nevertheless, when it comes to community activities like
fiesta and Christmas the respondents always attend.
Table 8: Participation of respondents in social activities
frequency Mean
Description
Visit co-members in their homes
50
3.04
Sometimes
Get together with co-members
50
3.54
Often
participate in our coop’s decision making
49
3.45
Often
Cañao
49
3.59
Often
Community activities (fiesta, Christmas
48
4.50
Always
Recreations
49
3.92
Often
Clan reunion
49
3.84
Often
Bayanihan
49
3.98
Often
Legend: 1--never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
30
Life Satisfaction of Respondents
As to life satisfaction of the respondents, Table 9 indicated that the respondents are
happy and somewhat satisfied with their lives as a whole these days. Moreover, the
respondents were somewhat close when it comes to their togetherness and feeling of
belonging on their coop. likely; the respondents have a moderate impact in making their
coop a better one. Life satisfaction is an overall assessment of feelings and attitudes about
one’s life at a particular point ranging from negative to positive this is defined by Beutell
2006 in his study.
Table 9: Life satisfaction of respondents
Frequency Mean Description
Taking all things together, would you say you areª
50
3.76
Happy
how much impact do you think members like you, 50
3.54
Moderate
can have in making your coop a better oneªª
impact
How would you rate the togetherness or feeling of
50
3.58
Somewhat
belonging in your coopªªª
close
how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these 50
3.60
Somewhat
daysªªªª
satisfied
Legend: ª1-Very unhappy 2-Unhappy 3-Unhappy 4-Happy 5-Very happy
ªª1-No impact 2-little impact 3-Neutral 4-Moderate impact 5-Big impact
ªªª11-Not close at all 2-Not very close 3-Neutral 4-somewhat close 5-Very close
ªªªª1-Very dissatisfied 2-somewhat dissatisfied 3-Neutral 4-somewhat satisfied 5-Very
satisfied
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
31
Support Given and Received by Respondents
Table 10 presents the support given and received by the respondents. With a mean
rating of five (5), the forty respondents reported that they gives are giving a lot of support
to their children. Concerning support they are giving to their parents, all of the
respondents reported that they also gives a lot of support. While the respondent’s gives
just enough support to their other relatives. As to supports received by the respondents,
39 of the respondents received a lot of support coming from their children and everybody
agrees that they also received a lot of support from their parents. And just enough support
received from their other relatives. In short the respondents received what they gave.
Table 10: Support given and received by the respondents
Frequency Mean
Description
Given to Parents
50
4.18
lot of support
Given to children
40
4.40
lot of support
Given to other relatives
50
3.98
just enough
Received from parents
50
4.18
lot of support
Received from children
39
4.31
lot of support
Received from other relatives
50
3.92
just enough
Legend: 1-no support 2-little support 3-neutral 4-just enough 5-lot of support
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
32
How Proud Does the Respondents in the Cooperative
Because the cooperative help their members financially, the coop is successful;
members have cooperation and applying discount to agricultural products to the members
are some of the reasons that made the respondents proud of their coop.
Table 11: How proud does the respondents in the cooperative
Frequency
Valid percent
How proud are you about who you are in the coop you 50
Mean 3.94
belong to
why
3
6
Help in financial status
Members have cooperation
1
2
Because the coop is successful
2
4
There is a discount to an agricultural products to the
1
2
members
Legend: 1-Very ashamed 2-Ashamed 3-neither proud nor ashamed 4-Proud
5-Very proud
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Relationship between Social Capital Variables with the Respondents
This is to determine the relationship of social capital variables with the respondent’s
group and poverty perception of the respondents-their position in household to be
specific.
Relationship between Sociability Variable and Position in Cooperative
With .027 respondents level of significance shows that there is significance
difference of officers and plain members of the cooperative in attending cañao. Officers
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
33
always attend while pain members often to attend. Same with recreations, clan reunion
and bayanihan, officers are found out that they always attend while plain members are
often when they attend with these activities.
Table 12: Social capital vs. position in cooperative
PARTICULAR
MEAN MEAN
Respondents
Officer Description Member Description level of
significance
Visit co-members in 3.33
sometimes 3.00
sometimes
.454
their homes
Get together with co-
members
3.67
often
3.52
often
.738
participate in our 4.00
often
3.37
often
.216
coop’s decision
making
Cañao
4.33
always
3.49
often
.027*
Community
4.50
always
4.50
always
1.00
activities
Recreations
4.50
always
3.84
often
.044*
Clan reunion
4.83
always
3.70
often
.004*
Bayanihan
4.83
always
3.86
often
.008*
Legend: *-not significant
1-- Never 2--seldom 3-sometimes 4- often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Age
Respondents who are younger than thirty years old, where sometimes to attend
cañao, respondents with thirty to fifty tears in age are often to attend while respondents
who are above fifty years in age always attend. This concludes that the older they are the
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
34
more they attend with this kind of activities. This finding collaborates with the study of
Milagros and Slangen, 2007 that older people tend to be more active in organizations
such as religious, cooperatives and local neighborhood gatherings.
Table 13: Sociability variable and age
Age mean
Sociability Variable <31
Descrip- 31-
Descrip- 41-
>50 Descri level
tion
40
tion
50
ption
of
signi
fican
ce
Visit co-members in 3.13
Some-
3.11 Some-
2.60 2.75 Some .683
their homes
times
times
times
Get together with 3.61
often
3.56 often
3.60 3.00 Some .725
co-members
times
Participate in our 3.48
often
3.41 often
3.60 3.23 Some .974
coop’s decision
times
making
Cañao
3.30
Some-
3.82 often
3.40 4.50 always .041
times
Community
4.97
always
4.06 often
3.75 4.50 always .910
activities
Recreations
3.65
often
4.02 often
4.00 4.50 always .089
Clan reunion
3.57
often
4.00 often
3.80 4.75 always .086
Bayanihan
3.60
often
4.29 always
4.00 4.75 always .015
Legend: 1-never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
35
Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Ethno Linguistic
With .037 respondent’s level of significance in visiting co members in their home
implies that there is a significance difference of ethno linguistic in visiting their co
members in their home. Ilokano and Kankana-ey often to visit their co member’s while
Kalanguya’s and Ifugao’s sometimes when they visit their co members in their home.
With this result, dialect spoken by the respondents affects in visiting their co members in
their home. This collaborates with the study of Milagrosa 2007 that dialect spoken is a
major attribute that bonds members of an ethnic group. Furthermore, by the definition of
wikepidia for ethno linguistic that ethno linguistic is the relationship between language
and culture, and the way different ethnic groups perceive the world may give a deeper
understanding why there is a significance difference of ethno linguistic.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
36
Table 14: Ethno Linguistic
Ilokano Descrip- Kanka Descrip- Kalan Ifugao level of
tion
na-ey tion
uya
significan
ce
Visit co- 3.52
often
3.33
Some-
2.67
2.67
.037*
members in
times
their homes
Get together
3.82
often
4.17
often
3.28
3.11
.067
with co-
members
participate in 3.75
often
4.00
often
3.11
3.22
.230
our coop’s
decision
making
Cañao
3.76
often
3.60
often
3.78
3.33
.529
Community
5.00
always
4.00
often
3.75
3.89
.712
activities
Recreations
4.06
often
3.80
often
3.78
4.00
.089
Clan reunion
4.12
often
3.80
often
3.50
4.00
.236
Bayanihan
4.17
often
4.00
often
3.72
4.11
.442
Legend: *-not significance 1-never 2-seldom 3-sometimes 4-often 5-always
Relationship Between Poverty Perception and Position in Household
To poverty perception of respondents whether they are the head or not head of their
household, the difference is not just much or high and it is just significant.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
37
Table 15: Poverty perception and position in household
Household head
level of
Household head not household head
significance
Description Description
How do you rate 2.93
neutral
3.15
neutral
.046
your household
Thinking about the 3.73
Somewhat 3.95
Somewhat
.260
future while still a
better off
better off
member of the coop,
do you think you and
your household will
be
If there is a crisis, 3.20
neutral
3.45
Somewhat
.183
how would you rate
powerful
your households
ability to survive
How confident
3.43
More
3.55
More
.492
would you say that
confident
confident
you and your
household would
cope in a crisis since
you became a coop
member
Being a member of 3.10
sometimes 3.30
neutral
.220
a coop, where would
you put your self
Legend:ª1-very poor 2-poor 3-neutral 4-rich 5-very rich
ªª1-much worse off 2-somewhat worse off 3-about the same 4-somewhat
better off 5- much better off
ªªª1totally powerless 2-powerless 3-Neutral 4-somewhat powerful 5-Very
powerful
ªªªª1-Much less confident 2-less confident 3-Neutral 4-more confident 5-Very
confident
Mean rating: 1-1.74=1 1.75-2.54 =2 2.55-3.34=3 3.35-4.14=4 4.15-5=5
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
38
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The Malabing Multi-Purpose Cooperative (MVMPC) was organized by 48
founding members last November 1989 and was registered at the Development Authority
in March 27, 1991. The cooperative is a specialist in Citrus Production.
Currently, MVMPC is the only cooperative in region 2 that caters services regarding
citrus production. Thus, the uniqueness and success story of this cooperative inspired the
researcher to conduct a study about social capital.
Social capital is how the members trust, participate and link with their co members
and with the other cooperatives.
From the responds of fifty respondents that were chosen by purposive random, most
of them are head or bread winner of their household. Females were bigger in number and
most of the respondents are married. Also, the respondents had a mean age of 34.34 years
old. Moreover, most of the respondents are regular members. Affiliated with different
religious and belong to different ethnic.
On measuring the level of social capital in the cooperative along informal networks,
least of the members were involved ad have an organization or group. Along trust, the
respondents trust if not very much trust their family, relatives and coop employees which
means that their level of trust is high. Moreover, the respondents rated their household as
neutral (neither rich nor poor) but are confident that they can survive since they became a
member of the coop. With regards to the participation of the respondents in the
cooperative, almost they are participating. As to life satisfaction, the respondents
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
39
indicated that they are happy and somewhat satisfied with their lives as a whole these
days.
With regards to relationship of social capital variables between sociability, officers
were more sociable. Respondents who are 41 and above in age were found out to be more
sociable than the younger respondents. On the other hand, the respondents who are head
and not head of their household had just significance or they almost have the same
perception with poverty.
Conclusions
1. Only few of the respondents have and are a member of a group or organization
in their community. These maybes because they are not aware that the group or
organizations exist or they don’t just like to join.
2. Almost all of the respondents attend coop’s activity/s. However, half of the
respondents attend once. This maybe because the cooperative don’t have an activity that
requires the presence of a member or the members are just lazy to attend.
3. In visiting co member in their home, ethno linguistic or different dialect
spoken and different culture practiced by the respondent hinders. Maybe this is because
the respondents don’t understand what their co members are saying or they are not in use
with the practices practiced by the respondents.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
40
Recommendations
1. Community foundations belief, that the levels of social capital in their
community is critical important to the overall health of the community. This is the reason
why members must have to be aware and join a group or organization that is useful in
their community. Because in joining groups or organizations, members could learn a lot
and can impart it with the improvement of the coop they belong and the other way
around. From the learning’s they learned from the coop, they could also impart it in the
group or organization he/she belongs to.
2. Adding coop’s activity in a year that requires member’s appearance is
recommended to the cooperative. So that closeness awareness and feeling of
belongingness in the coop will be better.
3. More Team building activities and recreation activities offer by cooperatives
could help the cooperative to solve the problems regarding ethno linguistic. Through
these activities the members would at least give knowledge and information’s regarding
their co member’s dialect and culture.
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
41
LITERATURE CITED
Beutell,N. 2006: Life satisfaction available at http://wf
network.bc.edu/encyclopedia_enty.php?id=3283&area=all accessed on September
15, 2008
Burchardt, T.: Social capital available at http://www.answers.com/topic/social-
capital?hl=social&hl=assets accessed on August 16, 2008
Carter, Carla LynDale: 2002 Reciprocity available at
http://csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/reciprocity.htm accessed on July 26, 2008
Carroll, Thomas F.: 2001 Social capital, Local capacity building and Poverty reduction
available at http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Social_Capital/chapter01.pdf
accessed on September o3, 2008
Claridge, Tristan: 2004 Social Capital available at http://www.gnudung.com accessed on July
26, 2008
Co-operatives secretariat Canada, 2004. Cooperatives and the Social Economy.
http://www.agr.gc.ca/rcs-src/coop/pub/pdf/soc_e.pdf . Accessed on September 15,
2008
Doreian P. and Snijders (editor): Social networks available at
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/505596/description
accessed on November 10, 2008
Fukuyam, Francis 1999: Social Capital and civic society available at
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/seminar/1999/reforms/fukuyama.htm accessed
on July 26, 2008
Halpern, David:2005 Book summary of social capital by David Halpern accessed at
http://www.crinfo.org/booksummary/10674
Hampel-Milagrosa, Aimée and Slangen Luis H. G. 2007 The social capital of indigenous
agricultural communities in Benguet, northern Philippines : socio-cultural
implications and consequences to local vegetable trade,
Garson, David G.2006:Social Capital Theory accessed at
http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/social capital.htm accessed on July 26,
2008
Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce 2005: Common goal available at
http://www.commongoalindy.org
Milagrosa, A 2007: Institutional Economic Analysis of Vegetable Production and
Marketing in Northern Philippines: Social Capital, Institutions and Governance
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
42
Narayan,Deepa:1999 Bonds and bridges social capital and poverty accessed at
http://www.psigeorgia.org/pregp/files/social%20capital.pdf
Smith, Mark K. social Capital:2008 accessed at http://www.infed. org/biblio/social
_capital.htm accessed on July 26, 2008
Taylof, Funk and Clark 2008:
Putnam, Robert: 1995 Bowling alone accessed at htt Reed, Lora: Service leanings as a
means of learning disaster preparedness partnerships and enhancing management
education accessed at http://aabss.org/journal2007/AABSS2007Article1Reed.pdf.
Webster dictionary, 1996
Weissmann, Mikael 2008: Informal networks as a conflict preventive mechanism
Accessed at www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/beijing/CPinNEA_ch5.pdf
accessed on March 19, 2009
Yago, A. 2000:Live the Malabing Way
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
43
APPENDIX A
Survey Questionnaire
Questionnaire No.________
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Name of cooperative:
________________________Location:___________________________
2. Is the respondent the head of household? ______ Yes ______ No
3. Sex of respondent: ______Male _______Female
4. Age of respondent: _______
5. Civil status: ______single; ________married; _________widow/er;
6. How long has respondent been a member of this cooperative? ____
7. Position in cooperative: _____ Officer _____ Member
8. Membership: _____ Associate member _____ Regular member
B. GROUPS/ NETWORKS AND PARTICIPATION
9. Please indicate if you belong to any of the following groups by answering the
appropriate columns
Group
Name of
How much
How actively do you
Organization
money do
participate in this
or Group
you
group’s decision-
contribute to
making
this group in 1 = Leader
a month
2 = Very active
3 = Somewhat active
4 = Does not
participate in decision-
making
Religious or spiritual group;
specify
Cultural, social, emotional/support
group such as BIBAK, senior
citizen; specify
Sports groups; specify
Basic services groups such as
Barangay Health Worker,
Mothers’ classes, Tanod; specify
Ethnic based groups such as tribe,
indigenous, community
organizations; specify
Production group such as farmers,
vendors groups; specify
Political party (Lakas NUCD,
Anakpawis, Bayan muna)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
44
Professional association (such as
Rotary, Lion’s , Chamber of
Commerce; specify
Other Cooperatives, specify name
Sociability
10. Please rate your participation in the following activities?
Never
2
3
4.
5. Always
(1)
I do the following informal activities
a. Visit co-members in their
homes
b. Get together with co-
members (for recreation,
parties etc.)
I participate in our coop’s decision
making
I attend the following activities
a. Cañao
b. Community activities
(fiesta, Christmas)
c. Recreations (sports fest,
film showing, liga)
d. Clan reunion
e. Bayanihan
Participation in Cooperative
11. On average, how much money do you deposit in your coop in a month?
_______________________________
12. On average, how often do you participate in your coop’s activities in a year?
____(Once); _____(Twice);______(More than twice) Specify ____________
13. Have you helped someone of the coop members in the last 6 months? ____ Yes
____ No: If yes how?___________________
14. Please indicate how you rate your coop whether active or inactive. Rank the reasons
why you chose your specific answer (1 is the most important and 5 is the least
important)
I. ACTIVE (serves 50% or more of
II. INACTIVE ( serves less than 50% of the
the members)
members)
____ a. Strong leadership
____ a. No strong leadership
____ b. Strong sense of cooperativism ____ b. no sense f cooperativism
____ c. Politics/politicians
____ c. Mismanagement of coop
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
45
____ d. Government support/
____ d. Conflict between groups
management
____ e. Desire to get ahead
____ e. Coop members think only about
economically
themselves (selfish)
____ f. Good governance
____ f. No government support/connections
____ g. Coop members’ delinquency on loans
____ i. Lack resources
C. TRUST
15. How much do you trust the following?
Not trust
Little
Neutral
Much
Very
(1)
trust (2)
(3)
(4)
much (5)
a. families/ relatives that are a
member of the same coop
b. friends that are a member of
the same coop
c. co-tribes that are a member of
the same coop
d. Neighbors
e. Coop employees
e1. Manager
e2. Board of Directors
e3. Bookkeeper/ Secretary
e4. Treasurer
e5. Collector
e6. Audit committee
e7. Credit committee
16. In times of financial difficulty, how confident are you that you can turn to these
different groups for a help?
Not
Little
Neutral Confid
Very
confident confide
(3)
ent (4) confident
(1)
nt (2)
(5)
Family/ relatives, friends,
neighbors,
Moneylender, Informal credit,
groups, associations
Government, Bank
Cooperatives and co-members
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
46
How much do you agree or disagree with each one of the statement.
Strongly
Disagr Neut Agre Strong
disagree (1) ee (2)
ral e (4)
ly
(3)
agree
(5)
In your coop, it is generally expected that
people will volunteer or help in coop
activities
People who do not volunteer or participate
in coop’s activities are likely to be
criticized or fined
Most of the coop members contribute to
coop’s activities
The rules, laws and policies that affect
your coop’s economic well-being change
without warning
Members like you generally have to do
favors to coop officers from time to time
to get things done
D. POVERTY PERCEPTION
18. How would you rate your household?
____ Very poor (1)
____ Poor (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ rich (4)
____ Very rich (5)
19. Thinking about the future while still a member of the coop, overall do you think that
you and your household will be…
____ Much worse off (1)
____ Somewhat worse off (2)
____ About the same (3)
____ Somewhat better off (4)
____ Much better off (5)
20. Being a member of the coop, where would you put yourself?
____ Totally powerless (1)
____ Somewhat powerless (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat powerful (4)
____ Very powerful (5)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
47
21. If there was a crisis, such as poor crops, loss of job, or illness, how would you rate
your household's ability to survive such crisis?
____ Very unsecured (1)
____ Somewhat unsecured (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat secure (4)
____ Very secure (5)
22. How confident would you say you that you and your household would cope in a crisis
since you became a member of the coop?
____ Much less confident (1)
____ Less confident (2)
____ Same (3)
____ More confident (4)
____ Much more confident (5)
E. LIFE SATISFACTION (Please check the appropriate number corresponding to your
answer)
23. Taking all things together, would you say you are…
____ Very unhappy (1)
____ Unhappy (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Happy (4)
____ Very happy (5)
24. Overall, how much impact do you think members like you, can have in making your
coop a better one?
____ No impact (1)
____ Little impact (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Moderate impact (4)
____ Big impact (5)
25. How would you rate the togetherness or feeling of belonging in your coop?
____ Not close at all (1)
____ Not very close (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat close (4)
____ Very close (5)
26. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?
____ Very dissatisfied (1)
____ Somewhat dissatisfied (2)
____ Neutral (3)
____ Somewhat satisfied (4)
____ Very satisfied(5)
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
48
27. How would you rate the support you are giving to parents, children or other relatives,
either living with you or living elsewhere since you became a member of the coop?
No support Little support Neutral
Just enough
Lot of
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
support
(5)
Parents
Children
Other relatives
28. How would you rate the support you are getting from parents, children or other
relatives, either living with you or living elsewhere since you became a member of the
coop?
No support
Little support Neutral
Just enough
Lot of
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
support (5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
29. People have different opinions about the most important problems that need to be
fixed to make the coop better. In your opinion, what is the BIGGEST problem facing
you, rank as 1? What is the SECOND biggest problem, rank as 2? What is the THIRD
biggest problem, rank as 3,
a. Management
b. Coop leaders
c. Members
___ Incompetence
___ Corruption
___ Negative values
___ Lack of Skills
___ Lack of leadership
like_______
___ Others _________
capability
___ Lack of cooperation
___ Negative values like
___ Others
_______
_________________
30. How proud are you about who you are in the coop you belong to?
Reason (s)
____ Very ashamed ________________________________
____ Ashamed
____________________________
____ Neither proud nor ashamed
____ Proud
____ Very proud
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
49
F. INFORMATION SOURCES
31. What are your sources of information? Kindly check
Yes
Source not What information do you get?
available
a. Newspapers, journals, magazines
b. Radio
c. Television
d. Clubs/groups/ association
e. With in vil age/neighborhood Sources
f . Outside Vil age
32. How proud are you about who you are in the coop you belong to?
____ Very ashamed
____ Ashamed
____ Neither proud nor ashamed
____ Proud
____ Very proud
G. DEMOGRAPHIC
33. How much formal schooling have you had?
____ None
____ Primary
____ Elementary
____ Secondary
____ University/ College or more
____ Vocational/technical
34. How many of the following live in your household?
a. Adult men (16 and over): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
b. Adult women (16 and over) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
c. Boys (15 and under) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
d. Girls (15 and under) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
e. Total Members: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
___
35. What is your occupation?
____ Housewife
____ Student
____ Self-employed: please specify _______________
____ Others, Please specify: _________________
36. What language/s and dialect/s do you speak?
____ English
____ Tagalog
____ Iloko
____ Ibaloi
____ Kankanaey
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
50
____ Kalanguya
____ others, specify___________________
37. What is your ethno-linguistic group?
____ Ilokano ____ Ibaloi ____ others,
specify______________
____ Kakanaey ____ Kalanguya
38. What is your religious affiliation?
____ Catholic
____ Islam
____ Born Again others, specify ______________
____ Iglesia ni Cristo
Social capital Among Members of Malabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative
in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya / Tracy P. Balagan. 2009
Document Outline
- Social capital Among Members ofMalabing Valley Multi-purpose Cooperative in Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- Background of the Study
- Statement of Problem
- Objectives of the Study
- Importance of the Study
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- Definitions of Social Capital
- Benefits Derived from Social Capital
- Forms of Social Capital
- Component of Social Capital
- Indicators of Social Capital
- Definition of Terms
- METHODOLOGY
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
- Demographic Profile of Respondents
- Level of Social CapitalGroups/Networks/Participation
- Level of Trust of Respondents
- Level of Confidence of Respondents
- Agreement on Expectations about the Cooperative
- Poverty Perception of Respondents
- Participation in Cooperative
- Participation of Respondents in Social Activities
- Life Satisfaction of Respondents
- Support Given and Received by Respondents
- How Proud Does the Respondents in the Cooperative
- Relationship between Social Capital Variables with the Respondents
- Relationship between Sociability Variable and Position in Cooperative
- Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Age
- Relationship Between Sociability Variable and Ethno Linguistic
- Relationship Between Poverty Perception and Position in Household
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- Summary
- Conclusions
- Recommendations
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDIX