BIBLIOGRAPHY NITIG, AISSA A. APRIL 2009....
BIBLIOGRAPHY
NITIG, AISSA A. APRIL 2009. Social Capital Among Members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi – Purpose Cooperative in Baguio city. Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Marie Klondy T. Dagupen, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to measure the social capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi - Purpose Cooperative.
Majority of the members were female (78%), are married (78%), are regular
members of the cooperative (96%), had been members of the cooperative for 6-10 yrs
(54%), are Ilocanos (40%), are Catholics (60%), finished college (62%), are household
heads (48%), have 6-10 members of the household (50%), are self-employed (36%) and
30% business owners. The mean age of the respondents was 44.64 years. Very few of the
members participate in religious, cultural/social, and political activities. Majority of the
members of the cooperative participate in the activities of the cooperative only once a
year. The members perceive that the cooperative has strong leadership, strong sense of
cooperativism, and has good governance. Many members perceive that they were
somewhat better off in the future as members of the cooperative, happy and somewhat
satisfied in life, and moderately contributing to the betterment of the cooperative.
In terms of educational attainment, they have different views on self-evaluation
but similar views on life satisfaction. The members grouped according to educational
attainment sometimes participate in community activities, clan reunions, and Bayanihan
projects.
The following recommendations were: continued intensive information campaign
for non-members and continued trainings and seminars for members; regularly review the
cooperatives goal and objectives and plan strategies to develop socialization activities
that may not interfere with their work hours; develop more systematic auditing and
checks and balances to eliminate problems on dishonesty and corruption; elect qualified
and trusted men and women as Board of Directors, in leadership positions and managing
director; and further study is conducted on a wider scope to help the cooperative diagnose
its strengths and weaknesses.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Objectives of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
3
Importance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Definitional Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Dimension of Social Capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
Social Capital Importance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
9
Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
10
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
11
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Locale and Time of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Respondents of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
13
Research Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Data Gathered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
15
Profile of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
15
Informal Groups/Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
20
iii
Level of Trust of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Level of Confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Level of Agreement of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
Participation in the Cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
24
Participation in Social Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Life Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Support Given and Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Pride in Cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
Poverty Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
Relationship between Poverty Perception
and Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
30
Relationship between Life Satisfaction
and Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
32
Relationship between Sociability of Members
nd Educational Attainment .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
33
Relationship between Sociability of Members
and Head of Household. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
34
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECCOMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . ..
36
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
36
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
37
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
37
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
39
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
A Letter to the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
B Survey Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
The Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative was conceived from
the earnest desire of the small market vendors to develop, own and manage a business in
the public market. It was formed in January 1998 by businessmen in the city market for
the bonafide vendors and peddlers with the end view of uplifting their economic well
being. The cooperative was started by five core incorporators namely: Leopoldo Dino,
Dr. Leonardo Ritos, Angelita Gayados, Peter Sagayo and Pablo Agulto. The cooperative
was registered with the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) on April 28, 1998
with subscribed share capital of P62, 500. There are 946 members and a paid up share
capital of P15, 628, 497 as of December 31, 2003. The savings deposit by 1, 630
associate and 610 regular members amounts to P8, 193, 305 and the total assets of the
cooperative now amount to P43, 546, 749. The services offered by the cooperative are:
savings, lending, time deposit placement, mutual services (mutual aid plan and damayan
aid) plan, hospitalization aid plan, and medical clinic. The cooperative is an affiliate of
three regional federations namely: NORWESLU, CUBC and NORLU CEDEC. It is an
affiliate also of a national federation, national market confederation of cooperatives
(NAMVESCO). The cooperative was lucky to be picked as one pilot coop of the
NATCCO Social Economic Development for Cooperatives in the Philippines (SEDCOP)
Financial Intermediation Project for Northern Luzon. The said project is a joint venture of
NATCCO and CIDA of Canada which aims to strenghten the organization and financial
capabilities of primary coopeatives by providing technical assistance and needed training
for the officers and management staff of each primary cooperative. After the project had
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
2
been terminated, the cooperative is now following the Cooperative Development
Authority set financial performance standards for all savings and credit cooperatives in
the Philippines.
The tremendous growth of this cooperative after ten years of operation from its
establishment is an interesting subject of study in order to learn from its success. Thus,
this study on social capital of the cooperative will be conducted.
Social capital is a concept in business, economics, organizational behavior, political
science, public health, sociology and natural resources management that refers to
connections within and between social networks. The first known use of the concept was
by L.J. Hanifan, state supervisor of rural schools in West Virginia. Writing in 1916,
Hanifan urged the importance of community involvement for successful schools, Hanifan
invoked the idea of social capital to explain why. For, Hanifan, social capital referred to
those tangible substances that count for most in daily lives of people namely goodwill,
fellowship, sympathy and social intercourse among the individuals and families who
make up a social unit. The individual is helpless socially, if left to him. If he comes into
contact with his neighbor and them with other neighbors, there will be an accumulation
of social capital, which may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may bear a
social potentiality sufficient to the substantial improvement of living conditions in the
whole community. The community as a whole will benefit by the cooperation of all its
parts, while the individual will find in his associations the advantages of the help, the
sympathy, and the fellowship of his neighbors (Coleman, J. 1990. Social Capital).
Pierre Bourdiue (1986) defines social capital as the aggregate of the actual or
potential resources, which are linked to possession of adorable network of more or less
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
3
institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition. His treatment of
the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of social capital and
the “deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating this resource”.
According to Fukuyama (1995), social capital is the ability of people to work
together for common purposes in groups and organizations. Groups are relationships
among individual working for common purposes. A critical aspect of effective group
functioning is that, the action of individuals when acting within or on behalf of the group
contributes to group aim (Stewart 1995).
Objectives of the Study
This study aimed to determine the level of Social Capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi - Purpose Cooperative. Specifically, it answered the following
questions:
1. To determine the demographic of profile of respondent.
2. To determine what is the level of Social Capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi – Purpose Cooperative.
a. Informal Networks
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
·
Participation in the cooperative
· Participation in the social activities
e. Life Satisfaction
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
4
3. To determine the relationship of the Social Capital variables:
· Relationship between Poverty Perceptions and Educational attainment
· Relationship between Life Satisfactions and Educational attainment
· Relationship between Sociability of Members and Head of Household
· Relationship between Sociability of Members and Educational
Attainment
4. To suggest specific actions to improve Social Capital for the cooperatives.
Importance of the Study
The researcher aspired to conduct this study for the benefit of the researcher
herself, the cooperative, aspiring members of the cooperative, the community, and the
nation.
During the phase of the study the researcher would gain essential knowledge
about research and about cooperative management which would be relevant for her in the
future. This will also be a training ground for her to smoothen the transition from a
student specializing in cooperative management to becoming a professional engaged in
agri-business.
The outcome of the study would serve as a management tool to assist the manager
and BODs of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-Purpose Cooperative through provision of
significant data imparted by this study.
The results of this study would help provide relevant information to members of
the BAMARVEMPCO and encourage them to become socially and economically
responsible to the community where it belongs.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
5
The success of BAMARVEMPCO would result to economic gain and if there is
income, there is tax. Tax is the lifeblood of the nation because through tax the nation
gains capital for its welfare and development.
The outcome of this study would serve as a reference for future researchers.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Definitional Issues
The term capital is used by analogy with other forms of economic capital, a social
capital is argued to have similar (although less measurable) benefits. However, the
analogy with capital is misleading to the extent that, unlike traditional forms of capital,
social capital is not depleted by use, but in fact depleted by non – use ( use or lose it).
Social capital is also distinguished from the economic theory social capitalism.
Social capitalism as a theory challenges the idea that socialism and capitalism are
mutually exclusive.
In the forms of capital (Pierre Bourdiue) defines Social capital as “the aggregate
of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of
more or less institutional relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition”. His
treatment of the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of
social capital and “the deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating
this resource”.
Social capital is about the value of social networks, bonding similar people and
bridging between diverse people, with norms of reciprocity (Dekker and Uslaner 2001;
Uslaner 2001). Sander (2002) stated that the “folk wisdom that more people get their jobs
from whom they know, rather than what they know, turns out to be true”. Adler and
Kwoon (2002) identified that the core intuition guiding social capital research is that
goodwill that others have toward us is available resource. As such, they define social
capital as the “goodwill available to individuals or groups”.
Dekker and Uslaner (2001) posited that social capital is fundamentally about how
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
7
people interact with each other.
Social capital does not have a clear, undisputed meaning, for substantive and
ideological reasons (Dolfsma and Danreuther 2003; Foley and Edwards 1997). For this,
reason there is no set and commonly agreed upon definition of social capital and the
particular definition adopted by a study will depend on the discipline and level of
investigation (Robinson, et al. 2002).
Not surprisingly considering the different frameworks for looking at social capital there is
considerable disagreement and even contradiction in the definitions of social capital
(Adler and Kwoon 2002). Because of the difficulties in defining social capital, authors
tend to discuss the concept, its intellectual origin, and its diversity of application and
some of its unresolved issues before adopting a school of thought and adding their own
definition (Adam and Roncevic 2003).
James Coleman defined social capital functionally as a variety of entities with two
elements in common: they all consist of some aspects of social structure, and they
facilitate certain actions of actors within the structure that is, social capital is anything
that facilitates individual or collective action, generated by networks of relationships,
reciprocity, trust, and social norms. In Coleman’s conception, social capital is neutral
resource that facilitates any manner of action, but weather society is better off as a result
entirely on the individual uses to which it is put.
According to Robert Putnam, social capital refers to the collective value of all
social networks and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each
other. Putnam and his followers stated that social capital is a key component in building
and maintaining democracy.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
8
Dimensions of Social Capital
Halpern identifies three "major cross-cutting dimensions" of social capital: components,
levels of analysis, and function. There are three components of social capital: networks
(the interconnecting relationships between people), norms (the rules, values and
expectancies that govern social interaction), and sanctions (the punishments and rewards
that enforce the norms). These three components interact, influence and reinforce each
other. For example, networks are shaped by norms, which are enforced by sanctions,
which are expressed through networks. Thus, the components of social capital, though
distinct, are interrelated and dependent upon each other.
There are also three levels of analysis for social capital: micro, meso and macro (though
many social capital scholars only recognize the meso-level as social capital). At the
micro-level, social capital consists of close ties to family and friends. Meso-level social
capital refers to communities and associational organizations. Macro-level social capital
consists of state and national-level connections such as common language and traffic
customs. According to Halpern, there is "some functional equivalence between the
different levels" and declining social capital on one level can sometimes be compensated
for increases on another level. For instance, if people in a society begin to have weaker
ties to their family (declining micro-level social capital), this loss could be functionally
offset by an increase in participation in community organizations (meso-level) or more
fervent nationalism (macro-level).
Finally, there are three primary functions of social capital: bridging, bonding and linking.
Bonding social capital refers to networks that are "inward looking and tend to reinforce
exclusive identities and homogeneous groups". Bridging social capital refers to networks
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
9
that are "outward looking and encompass people across diverse social cleavages".
Linking social capital links people across asymmetric power relations and "may be
provisionally viewed as a special form of bridging social capital that specifically
concerns power--it is a vertical bridge across asymmetrical power and resources". These
three functionalities exist simultaneously to varying degrees. For example, a black church
may bond black people together, bridge sexual divisions and link with powerful
politicians.
Social Capital Importance
Social capital is important to the efficient functioning of modern economies, and is the
sine qua non of stable liberal democracy. It constitutes the cultural component of modern
societies, which in other respects have been organized since the Enlightenment on the
basis of formal institutions, the rule of law, and rationality. Building social capital has
typically been seen as a task for "second generation" economic reform; but unlike
economic policies or even economic institutions, social capital cannot be so easily
created or shaped by public policy.
Social capital is important for a wide range of issues from child rearing to economic
development to how individuals (or communities) respond to a crisis situations. Social
Capital could be the defining characteristic of communities that pull together in the face
of high oil prices versus those that tear themselves apart in the ultimate tragedy of the
commons.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
10
Measurement
Social capital can be measured by the amount of trust and reciprocity in a
community or between individuals. Gulati (1998, in Beugelsdisk and Shalk, 2001: 6)
stated that social capital works by increasing communication, interaction, information,
transfer and thus cooperation between transacting partners without the influence of power
and market. Trust can make people go beyond the requirements of the contract through
early delivery, higher quality or some means to support their good intentions and sustain
trust. Trust is present when you expect your partner will perform the duties that are
expected of them.
Measuring social capital clearly has an intrinsic appeal (Inkeles, 2000) however,
as Fukuyama (2001) states, 'one of the greatest weaknesses of the social capital concept is
the absence of consensus on how to measure it'. The measurement of social capital and
the assessment of its contribution are certainly in their infancy (Fox, 1997). Daniere,
Takahashi et al (2002a) suggested that existing measures of social capital are subject to
criticism because researchers often define terms differently and because it is difficult to
develop concrete, tangible evidence of social capital that lends itself to quantitative
analysis. Durlauf (2002) supported this, positing that many definitions mix functional and
causal conceptions of social capital and that causal definitions of social capital are
necessary for successful empirical analysis. Paxton (1999) identified the widening gap
between the concept of social capital and its measurement. The popularity of the term
seems to have encouraged the use of overly-aggregated, heterogeneous indexes (Knack,
2002). Due to the abstract nature of social capital and varying definitions, it is often
measured inconsistently between studies (Liu and Besser, 2003). Previous studies provide
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
11
little rationale for how their measures of social capital connect to the theoretical
definition of social capital (Paxton, 1999).
Definition of Terms
Cooperative · is a form of business ownership that consists of a group of people who have
joined together to perform a business function more efficiently than each individual could
do alone.
Reciprocity · is the relationship between persons, corporations, states, or countries
whereby privileges granted by one are returned by the other.
Life satisfaction · is frequently included as an outcome or consequence variable in work-
family research.
Mutuality · the doctrine that specific performance must be available to both parties to a
transaction in order for either to obtain it.
Poverty perception · it is an imaginative extension of thought that conceives of
poverty as an agent of pollution.
Social capital · a concept in business, economics, organizational behav ior, political
science, public health, sociology and natural resources management that refers to
connections within and between social networks.
Social capitalism · is seen as the ability for a company to have or create positive, healthy
development.
Social norms · is the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values,
beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit.
Trust · is the ability to let others into your life so that you and they can create a
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
12
relationship built on an understanding of mutual respect, caring, and concern to assist one
another in growing and maturing independently.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
13
METHODOLOGY
Locale and Time of the Study
This study was conducted in Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative. The
cooperative’s office is located in Baguio City. This study was conducted in the second
semester of school year 2008 – 2009.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of the study were the officers and members of Baguio Market
Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative. The researcher selected fifty (50) respondents
randomly.
Research Instrument
Survey questionnaire was prepared by the researcher to gather necessary data. The
survey questionnaire is designed to capture the perception attitudes of officers and
members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative on social capital.
Data Gathered
The data gathered were the member’s profile, history of the cooperative and it’s
by – laws and articles of cooperation.
Data Analysis
The data gathered were tabulated, analyzed, and interpreted using descriptive
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
14
statistics such as frequencies, percentage and mean. As to mean range, 1 – 1.74= 1; 1.75
– 2.54= 2; 2.55 – 3.34= 3; 3.35 – 4.14= 4; 4.14 – 5= 5.
One – way analysis of Variance was used to determine relationships between the
respondents profile with social capital variables at <.05 level of significance.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Table 1 presents the demographic profile of the respondents. This consisted of their
position in household, age, sex, civil status, educational attainment, occupation, ethno-
linguistic group, religious affiliation, position in cooperative, membership in cooperative,
number of years of membership, and average number of household members.
Position in household. Twenty-four (48%) of the respondents consider themselves
as household heads.
Age. The mean age of the respondents was 44.64 years old.
Sex. The finding shows that the respondents were largely female. Thirty-nine (78%)
were female while 11 (22%) were male.
Civil Status. Out of 50 respondents, 39 (78%) were married, 4 (8%) were widowed, and 7
(14%) were single.
Educational attainment. A great majority (62%) of the respondent had finished a college
degree. 16 % finished a vocational course, 18% were secondary and 4% finished only
elementary school.
Occupation. Occupational role is often asked because one’s job provides a source of
personal identity. One important element of social standing is occupation since one’s job
affects all the factors related to one’s social standing: income, wealth and power.
According to Macionis (1997) “Occupation serves as a key source of social prestige since
we commonly evaluate each other based on the kind of work we do, holding in high
esteem while looking down on others”, from the result of this study, the different
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
16
occupation of the respondents were self-employed, housewives, vendors and
government/coop employee. 18 (36%) of the respondents reported that they were self-
employed, 15 (30%) were business man/woman, 9 (18%) were vendors, 7 (14%) were
housewives, and 1 (2%) is a government/coop employee.
Ethno-linguistic group. The respondents were classified into ilocano, 24 (48%), 10 (20%)
were kankana-ey, 5 (10%) were tagalong, and the rest were either kalanguya, ibaloi,
kankanaey-ibaloi or kakanaey/cebuano. The result shows that the highest number of
ethno-linguistic group in the cooperative were the ilocanoes, followed by the kankana-ey,
next were the tagalogs, then ibalois and kalaguya’s. The least number were the kankane-
ey-ibaloi’s and kankana-ey-cebuano.
Religious affiliation. As to religion 30(60%) were Catholic, 13 (26%) were Born again
and the rest were Anglican and Baptist
Type of membership. Almost all (98%) of the respondents reported to be regular
members of the cooperative.
Position in the cooperative. Almost all (96%) of the respondents reported to be regular
members of the cooperative.
Number of years of membership. Twenty (40%) of the respondents being members
within 1-5 years followed by 27 (54%) being members within 6-10 years and 3 (6%)
being members within 11-15 years.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
17
Table 1. Profile of respondents
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Household Head
24
48
Sex
Male
11
22
Female
39
78
TOTAL
50
100
Civil Status
Single
7
14
Married
39
78
Widow/er
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
Age
30 yrs and below
3
6
31-40
16
32
41-50
22
44
51-60
5
10
61 yrs and above
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
MEAN
44.64
Educational Attainment
Elementary
2
4
Secondary
9
18
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
18
Table 1. Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
University/college
31
62
Vocational
8
16
TOTAL
50
100
Occupation
Housewife
7
14
Self Employed
18
36
Vendor
9
18
Government/cooperative
1
2
Employee
Businessman / woman
15
30
TOTAL
50
100
Position in the Cooperative
Officer
1
2
Member
49
98
TOTAL
50
100
Membership
Associate
2
4
Regular
48
96
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
19
Table 1. Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Ethno linguistic group
Ilocano
24
48
Kankanaey
10
20
Ibaloi
4
8
Kalanguya
4
8
Kankanayey-Ibaloi
2
4
Kankanaey/ Cebuano
1
2
Tagalog
5
10
TOTAL
50
100
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
30
60
Born Again
13
26
Anglican
5
10
Baptist
2
4
TOTAL
50
100
No. of Years as Member of the Coperative
1-5 years
20
40
6-10 years
27
54
11-15 years
3
6
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
20
Informal Groups/Networks
Table 2 shows the groups/network and participation of the members of
BAMARVEMPCO. Based from the table, 28% of the BAMARVEMPCO participate in
religious groups and 72% do not participate (or just did not indicate). Six percent involve
themselves in social/cultural groups, 2% participate in sports groups, 6% participate in
production group, and 6% participate in other cooperatives while there was no response
in basic services groups, ethnic-base groups and political parties.
Table 2. Groups/Network and Participation
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Religious Group
Yes
14
28
Religious name
Lay of Eucharistic Ministry
1
2
LCF Pastoral Group
1
2
Baptist Church
3
6
Anglican
3
6
EL Shaddai prayer
4
8
Christian Fellowship
1
2
LCF Ladies group
1
2
No religious group
36
72
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
21
Table 2. Continued…
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Cultural, social Group
3
6
Yes
Cultural, Social Name
3
6
Senior Citizen
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Sports group
Yes
1
2
Sports name
Karatedo/Spinx
1
2
No response
49
98
TOTAL
50
100
Basic services group
No response
50
100
Ethnic-based groups
No response
50
100
Production group
Yes
3
6
Production name
Baguio Flowers & Brooms
2
4
Market Vendors Association
Flower shop Association
1
2
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
22
Table 2. Continued…
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCEN TAGE (%)
Political party
No response
50
100
Other cooperatives Groups
Yes
3
6
Cooperative name
BBCCC
2
4
HASCO COOP
1
2
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Level of Trust of Respondents
In table 3 on level of trust, the mean level of trust of the respondent’s with friend,
and co-tribes that are a member of the same coop and neighbors were relatively at 3.06,
2.82, and 2.86 meaning neutral. This shows that they neither trust nor not trust the friends
and co-tribes that are of the same coop and so with neighbors. However, as noticed in the
data, the higher mean trust rating was the families or relatives that are of the same coop
and the cooperative staffs and officers with a mean range of 4. This indicates that the
respondents trust much their families/ relatives, the cooperative staffs and officers.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
23
Table 3. Level of trust of members
TRUST VARIABLES
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Families/relatives that are a member
of the same cooperative
50
3.66
Much
Friends that are a member of the
same cooperative
50
3.06
Neutral
Co-tribes that are a member of the
same cooperative
50
2.82
Neutral
Neighbors
50
2.86
Neutral
Coop manager
50
3.48
Much
Coop Board of Director
50
3.68
Much
Coop Bookkeeper/Secretary
50
3.52
Much
Coop Treasurer
50
3.6
Much
Coop collector
50
3.58
Much
Coop audit committee
50
3.54
Much
Coop credit committee
50
3.48
Much
Legend: 1-Not trust; 2-Little trust; 3-Neutral; 4-Much; 5- Very much
Level of Confidence of the Respondents
Table 4 presents the level of confidence of the respondents, moneylender,
informal credit, groups, government, bank, cooperatives and co-members has at least
mean rating of 2.98, 3.08, and 3.32 (neutral). However, family/ relatives, neighbors have
the higher mean rating of 3.72 (confident). This shows that the respondents are confident
that can turn to families/relatives, friends, and neighbors in times of financial difficulties.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
24
Table 4. Level of confidence of the respondents
CONFIDENCE VARIABLE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Family/relatives, friends, neighbors
50
3.72
Much
Moneylender, Informal credit, groups
associations
50
2.98
Neutral
Government Bank
50
3.08
Neutral
Cooperatives and co-members
50
3.32
Neutral
Legend: 1-Not Confident; 2-Little Confident; 3-Neutral; 4-Confident; 5-Very Confident
Level of Agreement of Respondents
Table 5 presents the level of agreement of respondents. The respondent’s were
asked whether they agree or disagree with the statements about the cooperative. A mean
rating of 3.3 (agree) was given to the statements “It is generally expected that people will
volunteer or help in coop activities” and “most coop members contribute to coop
activities”. But they disagreed that people who did not volunteer in coop activities are
likely to be criticized or to be fined.
Participation in the Cooperative
Table 6 shows the data gathered on the participation in the cooperative. Based from the
results, 41 or 82% of the respondents participate in once a year in the activities of the
cooperative, and 9 participate twice a year. When asked to rate the BAMARVEMPCO,
49 98% perceive that the cooperative has a strong leadership, 43% view the cooperative
to have a strong sense of cooperativism, 34% perceive that 34% are active politicians,
74% perceive that the cooperative is active in government support/management, and 98%
view the cooperative to have good governance.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
25
Table 5. Level of agreement of respondents
EXPECTATION STATEMENTS
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
It is generally expected that people will
50
3.36
Agree
volunteer or help in coop activities
People who did not volunteer in coop
50
2.8
Disagree
activities are likely to be criticized/fined
Most coop members contribute to coop
50
3.14
Neutral
activities
Rules, laws and policies that affect your
50
2.84
Neutral
coop's economic well being changes w/o
warning
Members like you, generally have to do
50
2.96
Neutral
favors to coop officers from time to time
to get things done
Legend: 1-Strongly Disagree; 2-Disagree; 3-Neutral; 4- Agree; 5-Strongly Agree
Table 6. Participation in cooperative
PARTICIPATION IN THE COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY
MEAN
Frequency of participation in cooperative activities
Once
41
82
Twice
9
18
TOTAL
50
100
Have you helped someone of the coop members in the
last 6 months
Co-maker
23
46
Death aid
1
2
Guarantor
2
4
Give advice
4
8
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
26
Table 6. Continued…
PARTICIPATION IN THE COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY
MEAN
Lend money
20
40
TOTAL
50
100
ACTIVE
Strong leadership
49
98
Strong sense of cooperativism
43
86
Politics/ politicians
17
34
Government support/management
37
74
Desired to get head economically
47
94
Good governance
49
98
Participation in Social Activities
Table 7 shows the sociability of the respondents. The least mean rating was given
to the statement “visit co-members in their homes” with a mean rating of 1.3 (never). As
noticed on the table, the mean ratings of the respondents were ranged at 2 (seldom) and 3
(sometimes). This shows that their participation within the cooperative and within the
community is low.
Life Satisfaction
Satisfaction is a Latin word that means to make or do enough satisfaction with
one’s life implies a contentment with or acceptance of one’s life circumstances, on the
fulfillment of one’s wants and needs for one’s, life as a whole.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
27
Table 7. Sociability of respondent
SOCIABILITY VARIABLE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Visit co-members in their homes
50
1.3
Never
Get together w/ co-members
50
2.06
Seldom
Participating in coop's decision making
50
2.5
Seldom
Canao
50
1.76
Seldom
community activities
50
2.64
Sometimes
Recreations
50
2.42
Seldom
Clan reunion
50
2.88
Sometimes
Bayanihan
50
2.72
Sometimes
Legend: 1- Never; 2-Seldom; 3-Sometimes; 4-Often; 5-always
In Table 8 on life satisfaction, the respondent indicated that they are happy
(3.54) and somewhat satisfied (3.46) with their life as a whole these days. The
respondents perceived to have a moderate impact (3.68) in making the cooperative a
better one while neutral on the feeling of togetherness and belongingness in the
cooperative.
Support Giving and Getting to People
Table 9 summarizes the support given to and received from parents, children, and
other relatives. The respondents rated support giving to parents as 3.58 and support
giving to children as 4.14 meaning just enough support.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
28
Table 8. Life satisfaction of members
LIFE SATISFACTION VARIABLES
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Taking all things together, would you say
50
3.54
Happy
you are
How much impact do you think members
50
3.68
moderate impact
like you can have in making your coop a
better one
How would you rate your togetherness or
50
3.08
Neutral
feeling of belonging in coop
How satisfied are you with your life as a
50
3.46
somewhat
whole these days
satisfied
Legend: a 1-very unhappy; 2-unhappy; 3-neutral; 4-happy; 5-very happy
b 1-no impact; 2-little impact; 3-neutral; 4-moderate impact; 5-big impact
c 1-not close at all; 2-not very close; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat close; 5-very close
d 1-very dissatisfied; 2-somewhat dissatisfied; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat satisfied; 5-
very satisfied
Table 9. Support giving and getting
SUPPORT
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Giving to parents
50
3.58
Just enough support
Giving to children
50
4.14
Just enough support
Giving to other relatives
50
2.9
Neutral
Getting from parents
50
3.18
Neutral
Legend:1-No support;2-Little support;3-Neutral;4-Just enough support;5-Lot of support
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
29
Pride in the Coop
On the level of pride of members in the cooperative they belong to, they indicated
that they are proud with a mean rating of 3.6 presented in Table 10.
Poverty Perception
Table 11 shows the respondents mean rating of poverty perception. As to
household rate, the respondents had a mean rating of 3.16 which described as neutral. As
to their perceived rating for future, it is somewhat better off with a mean rating of 3.86
and for self evaluation being a member of the cooperative, they are neutral (3.08). Their
ability to survive crisis is rated as neutral and their confidence in coping with crisis in
situation is the same as when they were not yet members of the cooperative.
Table 10. Level of pride of respondents
PRIDE IN COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
How proud are you about who you
50
3.6
Proud
are in the coop you belong to
Legend: 1-Very ashamed; 2-Ashamed; 3-Neutral; 4-Proud; 5-Very proud
Table 11. Poverty perception of respondent
POVERTY PERCEPTION
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
VARIABLES
How do you rate your household
50
3.16 Neutral
Thinking about the future while still a
member of the coop, do you think you
50
3.86 somewhat
and your household will be..
better off
Being a member of a coop, where
50
3.06 Neutral
would you put your self
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
30
Table 11. Continued…
POVERTY PERCEPTION
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
VARIABLES
If there is a crisis, how would rate your
50
3.08 Neutral
household ability to survive such crisis
How confident would you say that you
and your household would cope in a
50
3.32 Neutral
crisis since you became a coop member
Legend: a 1-Very poor; 2-Poor; 3-Neutral; 4-Rich; 5-Very rich
b 1-Much worse off;2-somewhat worse off;3-about the same;4-somewhat better
off;5-much better off
c 1-totally powerless; 2-somewhat powerless; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat powerful; 5
very powerful
d 1-very unsecured; 2-somewhat unsecured; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat secures; 5
very secured
e 1-much less confident; 2-less confident; 3-neutral; 4-more confident; 5-much
more confident
Relationship Between Poverty Perceptions
and Educational attainment
Table 12 shows the respondents mean rating related to poverty perception with respect to
educational attainment. As to household rate, the respondents had a mean rating of 3.16
which is described as neutral and there is no significant difference in their responses. This
means regardless of educational attainment, they are similar in the rating for their
household. As to their perceived rating for the future, it is somewhat better off with a
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
31
mean rating of 3.86 and no significant difference among their perceptions. And for self
evaluation being a member of the coop, they are neutral (WM = 3.08) and there is a very
significant difference in their views as indicated by the significance level of 0.005 which
is lower than the chosen standard significance level 0.05. This means that the level of
education attained is a significant factor in poverty perception. Their ability to survive
crisis is rated as neutral and their confidence in coping crisis in situations is the same as
when they were not yet members of the cooperative. There are no marked differences in
the respondents’ perceptions.
Table 12. Educational attainment and poverty perception
POVERTTY PERCEPTION
ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM
SIG
VARIABLES
1. How do you rate your
3
3.22
3.23
2.87 3.16 0.673
household?
2. Being a member of the
4
3.78
3.77
4.25 3.86 0.483
cooperative, how do you rate your
(and with your household) future?
3. Being a member of the coop,
3
3
2.94
3.63 3.06 0.005**
where would you put yourself?
4. If there was a crisis like poor
crops, loss of job, or illness, how
3.5
3.33
2.87
3.5 3.08
0.25
would you rate your household's
ability to survive the crisis?
5. How confident would you say
that you and your household
3.5
3.33
3.26
3.5 3.32
0.84
would cope in a crisis since you
became a coop member?
Legend: ** highly significant
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
32
Relationship Between Life Satisfactions
And Educational attainment
Table 13 shows the mean ratings on life satisfaction according to educational
attainment. In all the indicators/questions, the perceptions of the respondents are similar
with one another as shown by the significance levels which are higher than 0.05. The
respondents perceive that they are generally happy members of the cooperative (WM =
3.47). They perceive that they have moderate impact in making their cooperative a better
one; neutral in rating togetherness or feeling of belongingness (WM = 3.27); they
perceive that they are somewhat satisfied with their life (WM = 3.60).
Table 13. Life satisfactions and educational attainment
LIFE SATISFACTION VARIABLES ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM SIG
1. Taking all things together, would
4 3.67
3.35 2.87 3.47 0.67
you say you are
2. How much impact do you think
4
4
3.64 3.62 3.82 0.5
members like you, can have in making
your coop a better one
3. How would you rate the
togetherness or feeling of belonging in
3.5 3.33
2.74
3.5 3.27 0.25
your coop?
4. All things considered how satisfied
are you with your life as a whole these
3.5 3.44
3.21 4.25 3.6 0.48
days?
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
33
Relationship Between Sociability of Members
And Educational Attainment
Table 14 presents the sociability of the members within the cooperative,
organization, and within the community as perceived by the members according to
educational background.
Based on the mean ratings from the results, the members never visit their co-
members (WM = 1.37) and there is no significant difference in their perceptions
according to educational attainment (0.14 > 0.05); they seldom get together with their co-
members (WM = 2.16) and there is no significant difference in their perceptions as
shown by a significance level 0.93> 0.05; they sometimes participate in the cooperative’s
decision-making (WM = 2.89) and their perceptions according to educational background
are significantly different from one another since .04 <.05. Furthermore, the members
seldom perform cañao (WM = 2.05) and the respondents are similar in their perceptions
since 0.08 > 0.05; they sometimes join in community activities (WM = 2.97) and their
perceptions are significantly different from one another according to educational
background because the significance level computed is .05. Moreover, the members
seldom have recreational activities (WM = 2.14) and no significant difference in their
perceptions; they sometimes have clan reunions and bayanihan activities and there is a
marked difference in their responses. Based from the findings, the members of BMVMC
seldom have time to socialize with other co-members maybe due to bulk of work and that
they are in their stalls whole day everyday. However, they sometimes join larger groups
of activities like community activities, clan reunion, and Bayanihan.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
34
Table 14. Sociability variables and educational attainment
SOCIABILITY VARIABLES ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM SIG
1. Visit co-members in their
2
1.11
1.39
1
1.37 0.14
homes
2. Get together with co-
members
2.5
2
2.03
2.13 2.16 0.93
3. Participate in coop's
3.5
3
2.19
2.88 2.89 0.04*
decision-making
4. Canao
2.5
2.56
1.52
1.63 2.05 0.08
5. Community activities
3.5
3.22
2.42
2.75 2.97 0.05*
6. Recreations
1
2.89
2.42
2.25 2.14 0.14
7. Clan reunion
4
3.56
2.61
2.88 3.26 0.03*
8. Bayanihan
2
3.33
2.48
3.13 2.73 0.04*
Legend: *significant
Relationship Between Sociability of Members
and Head of Household
Table 15 presents the sociability of the members within the cooperative,
organization, and within the community as perceived by the head of household.
Based on the results, the members never visit their co-members (WM = 1.30) and
there is no significant difference in their perceptions according to educational attainment
(0.93 > 0.05); they seldom get together with their co-members (WM = 2.06) and there is
no significant difference in their perceptions as shown by a significance level 0.34> 0.05;
they seldom participate in the cooperative’s decision-making (WM = 2.49) and their
perceptions are not significantly different from one another since .10 >.05. Furthermore,
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
35
the members never perform cañao (WM = 1.75) and the respondents are similar in their
perceptions since 0.30 > 0.05; they sometimes join in community activities (WM = 2.64)
and their perceptions are not significantly different from one another Moreover, the
members seldom have recreational activities (WM = 2.67) and no significant difference
in their perceptions; they sometimes have clan reunions (WM = 2.86) but they differ very
significantly in their perceptions; they sometimes perform Bayanihan activities and there
is no marked difference in their responses.
Table 15. Sociability of members and head of household
HEAD OF
HOUSEHOLD
SOCIABILITY VARIABLES
YES
NO
WM
SIG.
1. Visit co-members in their homes
1.29
1.31
1.3
0.93
2. Get together with co-members
1.92
2.19
2.06
0.34
3. Participate in coop's decision-making
2.25
2.73
2.49
0.1
4. Canao
1.58
1.92
1.75
0.3
5. Community activities
2.5
2.77
2.64
0.32
6. Recreations
2.17
2.65
2.41
0.11
7. Clan reunion
2.38
3.35
2.86
0**
8. Bayanihan
2.63
2.81
2.72
0.5*
Legend: *significant ** highly significant
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
36
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
This study was conducted mainly to determined the level of social capital among
the members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-purpose Cooperative, the study aimed to
determined the demographic profile of respondents, determined what is the level of social
capital among the members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-purpose Cooperative,
Informal networks, Trust, Poverty perception, Participation, Life Satisfaction, and to
determine the relationship of the social capital variables.
From the results and analyses, the following were the most salient findings of the
study.
1. Majority of the members are female (78%), are married (78%), are regular
members of the cooperative (96%), had been members of the cooperative for
6-10 yrs (54%), are Ilocanos (40%), are Catholics (60%), finished college
(62%), are household heads (48%), have 6-10 members of the household
(50%), are self-employed (36%) and 30% business owners. The mean age of
the respondents is 44.64 years.
2. Very few of the members participate in religious, cultural/social, and political
activities.
3. Majority of the members of the cooperative participate in the activities of the
cooperative only once a year. The members perceive that the cooperative has
strong leadership, strong sense of cooperativism, and has good governance.
4. Many members perceive that they are somewhat better off in the future as
members of the cooperative, happy and somewhat satisfied in life, moderately
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
37
contributing to the betterment of the cooperative.
5. In terms of educational attainment, they have differing views on self-
evaluation but similar views on life satisfaction.
6. The members grouped according to educational attainment sometimes
participate in community activities, clan reunions, and Bayanihan projects.
Conclusions
Based on the foregoing results and findings, the following conclusions were
derived:
1. Very few males and single are members of the cooperative; it is dominated by
females and married.
2. The members are very much engrossed in their work and almost have no time
for socialization.
Recommendations
The following were recommended by the researcher.
1. Continued intensive information campaign for non-members and continued
trainings and seminars for members.
2. Regularly review the cooperatives goal and objectives and plan strategies to
develop socialization activities that may not interfere with their work hours.
3. Develop more systematic auditing and checks and balances to eliminate
problems on dishonesty and corruption.
4. Elect qualified and trusted men and women as Board of Directors, in
leadership positions and managing director.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
38
5. Further study should be conducted on a wider scope to help the cooperative
diagnose its strengths and weaknesses.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
39
LITERATURE CITED
ALLEN, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000. Social Capital at
http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry retrieved on August 25, 2008.
BOURDIEU, P. 1986. Forms of capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
COLEMAN, J. 1990. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
DEKKER and USLANER, 2001. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social-
capital retrieved on September 19, 2008.
DURLAUF. 2002. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital retrieved
on September 19, 2008.
FLORA, C.1988. Building Social Capital: The Importance of Entrepreneurial Social
Infrastructure at http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/newsletter/june97/build-soc-capital.html
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
FOX. 1997. Measuring social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
FUKUYAMA. 1995. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital retrieved
on September 19, 2008.
GROOTAERT, C. et al. 2004. Measuring Social Capital, an Integrated Questionnaire.
World Bank Working Paper No. 18. Washington D.C. USA
GULATI.1998. Measuring social capital, an integrated questionnaire. World bank
working paper No. 18. Washington, D.C. USA.
HALPERN, D. 2005, Social Capital, Polity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom at
http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10674/ retrieved on September 29,
2008.
INKELES. 2000. Measuring social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
PUTNAM, R. 2000. Social Capital at http://www.infed.org/biblio/social_capital.htm
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
40
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
MILAGROSA, A & L. Slangen 2007. The social capital of indigenous agricultural
communities in Benguet, northern Philippines: socio – cultural implications and
consequences to local vegetable trade.
SOCIAL CAPITAL at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital retrieved on September
25, 2008.
SOCIAL CAPITALISM at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capitalism retrieved on
October 1, 2008.
STEWART.1995. Social Capital at http://www.infed.org/biblio/social_capital.htm
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
41
APPENDIX A
Letter to the Respondents
Republic of the Philippines
Benguet Sate University
La Trinidad, Benguet
Department of Agriculture Economics and Agribusiness Management
Dear Sir/Madam:
I am a fourth year student of Benguet State University, taking up Bachelor of Science in
Agribusiness major in Cooperative Management. Presently, I am conducting my
undergraduate thesis entitled: “Social Capital among Members of BAGUIO MARKET
VENDORS MULTIPURPOSE COOPERATIVE as partial requirement for
graduation.
In this connection, may I request a part of your time to answer the attached questionnaire.
Your kind assistance will enable me to complete all the requirements in due time. Please
give your honest answer for the success of this research. Rest assured that all the
information you provide will be treated with utmost confidentiality.
Aissa A. Nitig
Researcher
Approved By:
Marie Klondy T. Dagupen
Thesis adviser
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
42
APPENDIX B
Survey Questionnaire
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
How
How actively do you
of
much
participate in this group’s
Organi money do
decision-making
zation
you
1 = Leader
or
contribute 2 = Very active
Group
to this
3 = Somewhat active
group in a 4 = Does not participate in
month
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)
Professional association (such as
Rotary, Lion’s , Chamber of
Commerce; specify
Other Cooperatives, specify name
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
43
Sociability
10. Please rate your participation in the following activities?
Never (1) 2
3
4.
5. Always
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 II. INACTIVE ( serves less than 50% of the
of the members)
members)
____ a. Strong leadership
____ a. No strong leadership
____ b. Strong sense of
____ b. no sense f cooperativism
cooperativism
____ c. Politics/politicians
____ c. Mismanagement of coop
____ d. Government support/
____ d. Conflict between groups
management
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
44
____ 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
Little Neutral Much
Very much
trust (1) trust (2)
(3)
(4)
(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
Neutra Confident
Very
confiden confident
l
(4)
confident
t (1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
Family/ relatives, friends,
neighbors,
Moneylender, Informal
credit, groups,
associations
Government, Bank
Cooperatives and co-
members
17. How much do you agree or disagree with each one of the statement.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
45
Strongl Disagre Neutr Agree Strongl
y
e (2)
al (3)
(4)
y agree
disagre
(5)
e (1)
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)
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
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
46
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)
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
Neutral Just enough Lot of support
(1)
support (2)
(3)
support (4)
(5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
28. How would you rate the support you are getting from parents, children or other
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
47
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 support
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
(5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
29. 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
____________________________
30. 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
31. How much formal schooling have you had?
____ None
____ Primary
____ Elementary
____ Secondary
____ University/ College or more
____ Vocational/technical
3. 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?
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
48
____ English
____ Tagalog
____ Iloko
____
Ibaloi
____ Kankanaey
____ 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 Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
NITIG, AISSA A. APRIL 2009. Social Capital Among Members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi – Purpose Cooperative in Baguio city. Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Marie Klondy T. Dagupen, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to measure the social capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi - Purpose Cooperative.
Majority of the members were female (78%), are married (78%), are regular
members of the cooperative (96%), had been members of the cooperative for 6-10 yrs
(54%), are Ilocanos (40%), are Catholics (60%), finished college (62%), are household
heads (48%), have 6-10 members of the household (50%), are self-employed (36%) and
30% business owners. The mean age of the respondents was 44.64 years. Very few of the
members participate in religious, cultural/social, and political activities. Majority of the
members of the cooperative participate in the activities of the cooperative only once a
year. The members perceive that the cooperative has strong leadership, strong sense of
cooperativism, and has good governance. Many members perceive that they were
somewhat better off in the future as members of the cooperative, happy and somewhat
satisfied in life, and moderately contributing to the betterment of the cooperative.
In terms of educational attainment, they have different views on self-evaluation
but similar views on life satisfaction. The members grouped according to educational
attainment sometimes participate in community activities, clan reunions, and Bayanihan
projects.
The following recommendations were: continued intensive information campaign
for non-members and continued trainings and seminars for members; regularly review the
cooperatives goal and objectives and plan strategies to develop socialization activities
that may not interfere with their work hours; develop more systematic auditing and
checks and balances to eliminate problems on dishonesty and corruption; elect qualified
and trusted men and women as Board of Directors, in leadership positions and managing
director; and further study is conducted on a wider scope to help the cooperative diagnose
its strengths and weaknesses.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Background of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Objectives of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
3
Importance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Definitional Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Dimension of Social Capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
Social Capital Importance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
9
Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
10
Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
11
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Locale and Time of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Respondents of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
13
Research Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Data Gathered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
15
Profile of the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
15
Informal Groups/Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
20
iii
Level of Trust of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Level of Confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Level of Agreement of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
Participation in the Cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
24
Participation in Social Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Life Satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
Support Given and Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Pride in Cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
Poverty Perception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
Relationship between Poverty Perception
and Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
30
Relationship between Life Satisfaction
and Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
32
Relationship between Sociability of Members
nd Educational Attainment .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
33
Relationship between Sociability of Members
and Head of Household. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
34
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECCOMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . ..
36
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
36
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
37
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
37
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
39
APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
A Letter to the Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
41
B Survey Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
The Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative was conceived from
the earnest desire of the small market vendors to develop, own and manage a business in
the public market. It was formed in January 1998 by businessmen in the city market for
the bonafide vendors and peddlers with the end view of uplifting their economic well
being. The cooperative was started by five core incorporators namely: Leopoldo Dino,
Dr. Leonardo Ritos, Angelita Gayados, Peter Sagayo and Pablo Agulto. The cooperative
was registered with the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) on April 28, 1998
with subscribed share capital of P62, 500. There are 946 members and a paid up share
capital of P15, 628, 497 as of December 31, 2003. The savings deposit by 1, 630
associate and 610 regular members amounts to P8, 193, 305 and the total assets of the
cooperative now amount to P43, 546, 749. The services offered by the cooperative are:
savings, lending, time deposit placement, mutual services (mutual aid plan and damayan
aid) plan, hospitalization aid plan, and medical clinic. The cooperative is an affiliate of
three regional federations namely: NORWESLU, CUBC and NORLU CEDEC. It is an
affiliate also of a national federation, national market confederation of cooperatives
(NAMVESCO). The cooperative was lucky to be picked as one pilot coop of the
NATCCO Social Economic Development for Cooperatives in the Philippines (SEDCOP)
Financial Intermediation Project for Northern Luzon. The said project is a joint venture of
NATCCO and CIDA of Canada which aims to strenghten the organization and financial
capabilities of primary coopeatives by providing technical assistance and needed training
for the officers and management staff of each primary cooperative. After the project had
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
2
been terminated, the cooperative is now following the Cooperative Development
Authority set financial performance standards for all savings and credit cooperatives in
the Philippines.
The tremendous growth of this cooperative after ten years of operation from its
establishment is an interesting subject of study in order to learn from its success. Thus,
this study on social capital of the cooperative will be conducted.
Social capital is a concept in business, economics, organizational behavior, political
science, public health, sociology and natural resources management that refers to
connections within and between social networks. The first known use of the concept was
by L.J. Hanifan, state supervisor of rural schools in West Virginia. Writing in 1916,
Hanifan urged the importance of community involvement for successful schools, Hanifan
invoked the idea of social capital to explain why. For, Hanifan, social capital referred to
those tangible substances that count for most in daily lives of people namely goodwill,
fellowship, sympathy and social intercourse among the individuals and families who
make up a social unit. The individual is helpless socially, if left to him. If he comes into
contact with his neighbor and them with other neighbors, there will be an accumulation
of social capital, which may immediately satisfy his social needs and which may bear a
social potentiality sufficient to the substantial improvement of living conditions in the
whole community. The community as a whole will benefit by the cooperation of all its
parts, while the individual will find in his associations the advantages of the help, the
sympathy, and the fellowship of his neighbors (Coleman, J. 1990. Social Capital).
Pierre Bourdiue (1986) defines social capital as the aggregate of the actual or
potential resources, which are linked to possession of adorable network of more or less
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
3
institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition. His treatment of
the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of social capital and
the “deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating this resource”.
According to Fukuyama (1995), social capital is the ability of people to work
together for common purposes in groups and organizations. Groups are relationships
among individual working for common purposes. A critical aspect of effective group
functioning is that, the action of individuals when acting within or on behalf of the group
contributes to group aim (Stewart 1995).
Objectives of the Study
This study aimed to determine the level of Social Capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi - Purpose Cooperative. Specifically, it answered the following
questions:
1. To determine the demographic of profile of respondent.
2. To determine what is the level of Social Capital among the members of Baguio
Market Vendors Multi – Purpose Cooperative.
a. Informal Networks
b. Trust
c. Poverty Perception
d. Participation
·
Participation in the cooperative
· Participation in the social activities
e. Life Satisfaction
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
4
3. To determine the relationship of the Social Capital variables:
· Relationship between Poverty Perceptions and Educational attainment
· Relationship between Life Satisfactions and Educational attainment
· Relationship between Sociability of Members and Head of Household
· Relationship between Sociability of Members and Educational
Attainment
4. To suggest specific actions to improve Social Capital for the cooperatives.
Importance of the Study
The researcher aspired to conduct this study for the benefit of the researcher
herself, the cooperative, aspiring members of the cooperative, the community, and the
nation.
During the phase of the study the researcher would gain essential knowledge
about research and about cooperative management which would be relevant for her in the
future. This will also be a training ground for her to smoothen the transition from a
student specializing in cooperative management to becoming a professional engaged in
agri-business.
The outcome of the study would serve as a management tool to assist the manager
and BODs of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-Purpose Cooperative through provision of
significant data imparted by this study.
The results of this study would help provide relevant information to members of
the BAMARVEMPCO and encourage them to become socially and economically
responsible to the community where it belongs.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
5
The success of BAMARVEMPCO would result to economic gain and if there is
income, there is tax. Tax is the lifeblood of the nation because through tax the nation
gains capital for its welfare and development.
The outcome of this study would serve as a reference for future researchers.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
6
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Definitional Issues
The term capital is used by analogy with other forms of economic capital, a social
capital is argued to have similar (although less measurable) benefits. However, the
analogy with capital is misleading to the extent that, unlike traditional forms of capital,
social capital is not depleted by use, but in fact depleted by non – use ( use or lose it).
Social capital is also distinguished from the economic theory social capitalism.
Social capitalism as a theory challenges the idea that socialism and capitalism are
mutually exclusive.
In the forms of capital (Pierre Bourdiue) defines Social capital as “the aggregate
of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of
more or less institutional relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition”. His
treatment of the concept is instrumental, focusing on the advantages to possessors of
social capital and “the deliberate construction of sociability for the purpose of creating
this resource”.
Social capital is about the value of social networks, bonding similar people and
bridging between diverse people, with norms of reciprocity (Dekker and Uslaner 2001;
Uslaner 2001). Sander (2002) stated that the “folk wisdom that more people get their jobs
from whom they know, rather than what they know, turns out to be true”. Adler and
Kwoon (2002) identified that the core intuition guiding social capital research is that
goodwill that others have toward us is available resource. As such, they define social
capital as the “goodwill available to individuals or groups”.
Dekker and Uslaner (2001) posited that social capital is fundamentally about how
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
7
people interact with each other.
Social capital does not have a clear, undisputed meaning, for substantive and
ideological reasons (Dolfsma and Danreuther 2003; Foley and Edwards 1997). For this,
reason there is no set and commonly agreed upon definition of social capital and the
particular definition adopted by a study will depend on the discipline and level of
investigation (Robinson, et al. 2002).
Not surprisingly considering the different frameworks for looking at social capital there is
considerable disagreement and even contradiction in the definitions of social capital
(Adler and Kwoon 2002). Because of the difficulties in defining social capital, authors
tend to discuss the concept, its intellectual origin, and its diversity of application and
some of its unresolved issues before adopting a school of thought and adding their own
definition (Adam and Roncevic 2003).
James Coleman defined social capital functionally as a variety of entities with two
elements in common: they all consist of some aspects of social structure, and they
facilitate certain actions of actors within the structure that is, social capital is anything
that facilitates individual or collective action, generated by networks of relationships,
reciprocity, trust, and social norms. In Coleman’s conception, social capital is neutral
resource that facilitates any manner of action, but weather society is better off as a result
entirely on the individual uses to which it is put.
According to Robert Putnam, social capital refers to the collective value of all
social networks and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each
other. Putnam and his followers stated that social capital is a key component in building
and maintaining democracy.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
8
Dimensions of Social Capital
Halpern identifies three "major cross-cutting dimensions" of social capital: components,
levels of analysis, and function. There are three components of social capital: networks
(the interconnecting relationships between people), norms (the rules, values and
expectancies that govern social interaction), and sanctions (the punishments and rewards
that enforce the norms). These three components interact, influence and reinforce each
other. For example, networks are shaped by norms, which are enforced by sanctions,
which are expressed through networks. Thus, the components of social capital, though
distinct, are interrelated and dependent upon each other.
There are also three levels of analysis for social capital: micro, meso and macro (though
many social capital scholars only recognize the meso-level as social capital). At the
micro-level, social capital consists of close ties to family and friends. Meso-level social
capital refers to communities and associational organizations. Macro-level social capital
consists of state and national-level connections such as common language and traffic
customs. According to Halpern, there is "some functional equivalence between the
different levels" and declining social capital on one level can sometimes be compensated
for increases on another level. For instance, if people in a society begin to have weaker
ties to their family (declining micro-level social capital), this loss could be functionally
offset by an increase in participation in community organizations (meso-level) or more
fervent nationalism (macro-level).
Finally, there are three primary functions of social capital: bridging, bonding and linking.
Bonding social capital refers to networks that are "inward looking and tend to reinforce
exclusive identities and homogeneous groups". Bridging social capital refers to networks
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
9
that are "outward looking and encompass people across diverse social cleavages".
Linking social capital links people across asymmetric power relations and "may be
provisionally viewed as a special form of bridging social capital that specifically
concerns power--it is a vertical bridge across asymmetrical power and resources". These
three functionalities exist simultaneously to varying degrees. For example, a black church
may bond black people together, bridge sexual divisions and link with powerful
politicians.
Social Capital Importance
Social capital is important to the efficient functioning of modern economies, and is the
sine qua non of stable liberal democracy. It constitutes the cultural component of modern
societies, which in other respects have been organized since the Enlightenment on the
basis of formal institutions, the rule of law, and rationality. Building social capital has
typically been seen as a task for "second generation" economic reform; but unlike
economic policies or even economic institutions, social capital cannot be so easily
created or shaped by public policy.
Social capital is important for a wide range of issues from child rearing to economic
development to how individuals (or communities) respond to a crisis situations. Social
Capital could be the defining characteristic of communities that pull together in the face
of high oil prices versus those that tear themselves apart in the ultimate tragedy of the
commons.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
10
Measurement
Social capital can be measured by the amount of trust and reciprocity in a
community or between individuals. Gulati (1998, in Beugelsdisk and Shalk, 2001: 6)
stated that social capital works by increasing communication, interaction, information,
transfer and thus cooperation between transacting partners without the influence of power
and market. Trust can make people go beyond the requirements of the contract through
early delivery, higher quality or some means to support their good intentions and sustain
trust. Trust is present when you expect your partner will perform the duties that are
expected of them.
Measuring social capital clearly has an intrinsic appeal (Inkeles, 2000) however,
as Fukuyama (2001) states, 'one of the greatest weaknesses of the social capital concept is
the absence of consensus on how to measure it'. The measurement of social capital and
the assessment of its contribution are certainly in their infancy (Fox, 1997). Daniere,
Takahashi et al (2002a) suggested that existing measures of social capital are subject to
criticism because researchers often define terms differently and because it is difficult to
develop concrete, tangible evidence of social capital that lends itself to quantitative
analysis. Durlauf (2002) supported this, positing that many definitions mix functional and
causal conceptions of social capital and that causal definitions of social capital are
necessary for successful empirical analysis. Paxton (1999) identified the widening gap
between the concept of social capital and its measurement. The popularity of the term
seems to have encouraged the use of overly-aggregated, heterogeneous indexes (Knack,
2002). Due to the abstract nature of social capital and varying definitions, it is often
measured inconsistently between studies (Liu and Besser, 2003). Previous studies provide
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
11
little rationale for how their measures of social capital connect to the theoretical
definition of social capital (Paxton, 1999).
Definition of Terms
Cooperative · is a form of business ownership that consists of a group of people who have
joined together to perform a business function more efficiently than each individual could
do alone.
Reciprocity · is the relationship between persons, corporations, states, or countries
whereby privileges granted by one are returned by the other.
Life satisfaction · is frequently included as an outcome or consequence variable in work-
family research.
Mutuality · the doctrine that specific performance must be available to both parties to a
transaction in order for either to obtain it.
Poverty perception · it is an imaginative extension of thought that conceives of
poverty as an agent of pollution.
Social capital · a concept in business, economics, organizational behav ior, political
science, public health, sociology and natural resources management that refers to
connections within and between social networks.
Social capitalism · is seen as the ability for a company to have or create positive, healthy
development.
Social norms · is the rules that a group uses for appropriate and inappropriate values,
beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. These rules may be explicit or implicit.
Trust · is the ability to let others into your life so that you and they can create a
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
12
relationship built on an understanding of mutual respect, caring, and concern to assist one
another in growing and maturing independently.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
13
METHODOLOGY
Locale and Time of the Study
This study was conducted in Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative. The
cooperative’s office is located in Baguio City. This study was conducted in the second
semester of school year 2008 – 2009.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of the study were the officers and members of Baguio Market
Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative. The researcher selected fifty (50) respondents
randomly.
Research Instrument
Survey questionnaire was prepared by the researcher to gather necessary data. The
survey questionnaire is designed to capture the perception attitudes of officers and
members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – purpose Cooperative on social capital.
Data Gathered
The data gathered were the member’s profile, history of the cooperative and it’s
by – laws and articles of cooperation.
Data Analysis
The data gathered were tabulated, analyzed, and interpreted using descriptive
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
14
statistics such as frequencies, percentage and mean. As to mean range, 1 – 1.74= 1; 1.75
– 2.54= 2; 2.55 – 3.34= 3; 3.35 – 4.14= 4; 4.14 – 5= 5.
One – way analysis of Variance was used to determine relationships between the
respondents profile with social capital variables at <.05 level of significance.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Table 1 presents the demographic profile of the respondents. This consisted of their
position in household, age, sex, civil status, educational attainment, occupation, ethno-
linguistic group, religious affiliation, position in cooperative, membership in cooperative,
number of years of membership, and average number of household members.
Position in household. Twenty-four (48%) of the respondents consider themselves
as household heads.
Age. The mean age of the respondents was 44.64 years old.
Sex. The finding shows that the respondents were largely female. Thirty-nine (78%)
were female while 11 (22%) were male.
Civil Status. Out of 50 respondents, 39 (78%) were married, 4 (8%) were widowed, and 7
(14%) were single.
Educational attainment. A great majority (62%) of the respondent had finished a college
degree. 16 % finished a vocational course, 18% were secondary and 4% finished only
elementary school.
Occupation. Occupational role is often asked because one’s job provides a source of
personal identity. One important element of social standing is occupation since one’s job
affects all the factors related to one’s social standing: income, wealth and power.
According to Macionis (1997) “Occupation serves as a key source of social prestige since
we commonly evaluate each other based on the kind of work we do, holding in high
esteem while looking down on others”, from the result of this study, the different
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
16
occupation of the respondents were self-employed, housewives, vendors and
government/coop employee. 18 (36%) of the respondents reported that they were self-
employed, 15 (30%) were business man/woman, 9 (18%) were vendors, 7 (14%) were
housewives, and 1 (2%) is a government/coop employee.
Ethno-linguistic group. The respondents were classified into ilocano, 24 (48%), 10 (20%)
were kankana-ey, 5 (10%) were tagalong, and the rest were either kalanguya, ibaloi,
kankanaey-ibaloi or kakanaey/cebuano. The result shows that the highest number of
ethno-linguistic group in the cooperative were the ilocanoes, followed by the kankana-ey,
next were the tagalogs, then ibalois and kalaguya’s. The least number were the kankane-
ey-ibaloi’s and kankana-ey-cebuano.
Religious affiliation. As to religion 30(60%) were Catholic, 13 (26%) were Born again
and the rest were Anglican and Baptist
Type of membership. Almost all (98%) of the respondents reported to be regular
members of the cooperative.
Position in the cooperative. Almost all (96%) of the respondents reported to be regular
members of the cooperative.
Number of years of membership. Twenty (40%) of the respondents being members
within 1-5 years followed by 27 (54%) being members within 6-10 years and 3 (6%)
being members within 11-15 years.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
17
Table 1. Profile of respondents
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Household Head
24
48
Sex
Male
11
22
Female
39
78
TOTAL
50
100
Civil Status
Single
7
14
Married
39
78
Widow/er
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
Age
30 yrs and below
3
6
31-40
16
32
41-50
22
44
51-60
5
10
61 yrs and above
4
8
TOTAL
50
100
MEAN
44.64
Educational Attainment
Elementary
2
4
Secondary
9
18
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
18
Table 1. Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
University/college
31
62
Vocational
8
16
TOTAL
50
100
Occupation
Housewife
7
14
Self Employed
18
36
Vendor
9
18
Government/cooperative
1
2
Employee
Businessman / woman
15
30
TOTAL
50
100
Position in the Cooperative
Officer
1
2
Member
49
98
TOTAL
50
100
Membership
Associate
2
4
Regular
48
96
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
19
Table 1. Continued…
PARTICULAR
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Ethno linguistic group
Ilocano
24
48
Kankanaey
10
20
Ibaloi
4
8
Kalanguya
4
8
Kankanayey-Ibaloi
2
4
Kankanaey/ Cebuano
1
2
Tagalog
5
10
TOTAL
50
100
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
30
60
Born Again
13
26
Anglican
5
10
Baptist
2
4
TOTAL
50
100
No. of Years as Member of the Coperative
1-5 years
20
40
6-10 years
27
54
11-15 years
3
6
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
20
Informal Groups/Networks
Table 2 shows the groups/network and participation of the members of
BAMARVEMPCO. Based from the table, 28% of the BAMARVEMPCO participate in
religious groups and 72% do not participate (or just did not indicate). Six percent involve
themselves in social/cultural groups, 2% participate in sports groups, 6% participate in
production group, and 6% participate in other cooperatives while there was no response
in basic services groups, ethnic-base groups and political parties.
Table 2. Groups/Network and Participation
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Religious Group
Yes
14
28
Religious name
Lay of Eucharistic Ministry
1
2
LCF Pastoral Group
1
2
Baptist Church
3
6
Anglican
3
6
EL Shaddai prayer
4
8
Christian Fellowship
1
2
LCF Ladies group
1
2
No religious group
36
72
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
21
Table 2. Continued…
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCENTAGE (%)
Cultural, social Group
3
6
Yes
Cultural, Social Name
3
6
Senior Citizen
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Sports group
Yes
1
2
Sports name
Karatedo/Spinx
1
2
No response
49
98
TOTAL
50
100
Basic services group
No response
50
100
Ethnic-based groups
No response
50
100
Production group
Yes
3
6
Production name
Baguio Flowers & Brooms
2
4
Market Vendors Association
Flower shop Association
1
2
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
22
Table 2. Continued…
GROUPS/NETWORKS
FREQUENCY (F)
PERCEN TAGE (%)
Political party
No response
50
100
Other cooperatives Groups
Yes
3
6
Cooperative name
BBCCC
2
4
HASCO COOP
1
2
No response
47
94
TOTAL
50
100
Level of Trust of Respondents
In table 3 on level of trust, the mean level of trust of the respondent’s with friend,
and co-tribes that are a member of the same coop and neighbors were relatively at 3.06,
2.82, and 2.86 meaning neutral. This shows that they neither trust nor not trust the friends
and co-tribes that are of the same coop and so with neighbors. However, as noticed in the
data, the higher mean trust rating was the families or relatives that are of the same coop
and the cooperative staffs and officers with a mean range of 4. This indicates that the
respondents trust much their families/ relatives, the cooperative staffs and officers.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
23
Table 3. Level of trust of members
TRUST VARIABLES
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Families/relatives that are a member
of the same cooperative
50
3.66
Much
Friends that are a member of the
same cooperative
50
3.06
Neutral
Co-tribes that are a member of the
same cooperative
50
2.82
Neutral
Neighbors
50
2.86
Neutral
Coop manager
50
3.48
Much
Coop Board of Director
50
3.68
Much
Coop Bookkeeper/Secretary
50
3.52
Much
Coop Treasurer
50
3.6
Much
Coop collector
50
3.58
Much
Coop audit committee
50
3.54
Much
Coop credit committee
50
3.48
Much
Legend: 1-Not trust; 2-Little trust; 3-Neutral; 4-Much; 5- Very much
Level of Confidence of the Respondents
Table 4 presents the level of confidence of the respondents, moneylender,
informal credit, groups, government, bank, cooperatives and co-members has at least
mean rating of 2.98, 3.08, and 3.32 (neutral). However, family/ relatives, neighbors have
the higher mean rating of 3.72 (confident). This shows that the respondents are confident
that can turn to families/relatives, friends, and neighbors in times of financial difficulties.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
24
Table 4. Level of confidence of the respondents
CONFIDENCE VARIABLE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Family/relatives, friends, neighbors
50
3.72
Much
Moneylender, Informal credit, groups
associations
50
2.98
Neutral
Government Bank
50
3.08
Neutral
Cooperatives and co-members
50
3.32
Neutral
Legend: 1-Not Confident; 2-Little Confident; 3-Neutral; 4-Confident; 5-Very Confident
Level of Agreement of Respondents
Table 5 presents the level of agreement of respondents. The respondent’s were
asked whether they agree or disagree with the statements about the cooperative. A mean
rating of 3.3 (agree) was given to the statements “It is generally expected that people will
volunteer or help in coop activities” and “most coop members contribute to coop
activities”. But they disagreed that people who did not volunteer in coop activities are
likely to be criticized or to be fined.
Participation in the Cooperative
Table 6 shows the data gathered on the participation in the cooperative. Based from the
results, 41 or 82% of the respondents participate in once a year in the activities of the
cooperative, and 9 participate twice a year. When asked to rate the BAMARVEMPCO,
49 98% perceive that the cooperative has a strong leadership, 43% view the cooperative
to have a strong sense of cooperativism, 34% perceive that 34% are active politicians,
74% perceive that the cooperative is active in government support/management, and 98%
view the cooperative to have good governance.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
25
Table 5. Level of agreement of respondents
EXPECTATION STATEMENTS
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
It is generally expected that people will
50
3.36
Agree
volunteer or help in coop activities
People who did not volunteer in coop
50
2.8
Disagree
activities are likely to be criticized/fined
Most coop members contribute to coop
50
3.14
Neutral
activities
Rules, laws and policies that affect your
50
2.84
Neutral
coop's economic well being changes w/o
warning
Members like you, generally have to do
50
2.96
Neutral
favors to coop officers from time to time
to get things done
Legend: 1-Strongly Disagree; 2-Disagree; 3-Neutral; 4- Agree; 5-Strongly Agree
Table 6. Participation in cooperative
PARTICIPATION IN THE COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY
MEAN
Frequency of participation in cooperative activities
Once
41
82
Twice
9
18
TOTAL
50
100
Have you helped someone of the coop members in the
last 6 months
Co-maker
23
46
Death aid
1
2
Guarantor
2
4
Give advice
4
8
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
26
Table 6. Continued…
PARTICIPATION IN THE COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY
MEAN
Lend money
20
40
TOTAL
50
100
ACTIVE
Strong leadership
49
98
Strong sense of cooperativism
43
86
Politics/ politicians
17
34
Government support/management
37
74
Desired to get head economically
47
94
Good governance
49
98
Participation in Social Activities
Table 7 shows the sociability of the respondents. The least mean rating was given
to the statement “visit co-members in their homes” with a mean rating of 1.3 (never). As
noticed on the table, the mean ratings of the respondents were ranged at 2 (seldom) and 3
(sometimes). This shows that their participation within the cooperative and within the
community is low.
Life Satisfaction
Satisfaction is a Latin word that means to make or do enough satisfaction with
one’s life implies a contentment with or acceptance of one’s life circumstances, on the
fulfillment of one’s wants and needs for one’s, life as a whole.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
27
Table 7. Sociability of respondent
SOCIABILITY VARIABLE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Visit co-members in their homes
50
1.3
Never
Get together w/ co-members
50
2.06
Seldom
Participating in coop's decision making
50
2.5
Seldom
Canao
50
1.76
Seldom
community activities
50
2.64
Sometimes
Recreations
50
2.42
Seldom
Clan reunion
50
2.88
Sometimes
Bayanihan
50
2.72
Sometimes
Legend: 1- Never; 2-Seldom; 3-Sometimes; 4-Often; 5-always
In Table 8 on life satisfaction, the respondent indicated that they are happy
(3.54) and somewhat satisfied (3.46) with their life as a whole these days. The
respondents perceived to have a moderate impact (3.68) in making the cooperative a
better one while neutral on the feeling of togetherness and belongingness in the
cooperative.
Support Giving and Getting to People
Table 9 summarizes the support given to and received from parents, children, and
other relatives. The respondents rated support giving to parents as 3.58 and support
giving to children as 4.14 meaning just enough support.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
28
Table 8. Life satisfaction of members
LIFE SATISFACTION VARIABLES
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Taking all things together, would you say
50
3.54
Happy
you are
How much impact do you think members
50
3.68
moderate impact
like you can have in making your coop a
better one
How would you rate your togetherness or
50
3.08
Neutral
feeling of belonging in coop
How satisfied are you with your life as a
50
3.46
somewhat
whole these days
satisfied
Legend: a 1-very unhappy; 2-unhappy; 3-neutral; 4-happy; 5-very happy
b 1-no impact; 2-little impact; 3-neutral; 4-moderate impact; 5-big impact
c 1-not close at all; 2-not very close; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat close; 5-very close
d 1-very dissatisfied; 2-somewhat dissatisfied; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat satisfied; 5-
very satisfied
Table 9. Support giving and getting
SUPPORT
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
Giving to parents
50
3.58
Just enough support
Giving to children
50
4.14
Just enough support
Giving to other relatives
50
2.9
Neutral
Getting from parents
50
3.18
Neutral
Legend:1-No support;2-Little support;3-Neutral;4-Just enough support;5-Lot of support
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
29
Pride in the Coop
On the level of pride of members in the cooperative they belong to, they indicated
that they are proud with a mean rating of 3.6 presented in Table 10.
Poverty Perception
Table 11 shows the respondents mean rating of poverty perception. As to
household rate, the respondents had a mean rating of 3.16 which described as neutral. As
to their perceived rating for future, it is somewhat better off with a mean rating of 3.86
and for self evaluation being a member of the cooperative, they are neutral (3.08). Their
ability to survive crisis is rated as neutral and their confidence in coping with crisis in
situation is the same as when they were not yet members of the cooperative.
Table 10. Level of pride of respondents
PRIDE IN COOPERATIVE
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
How proud are you about who you
50
3.6
Proud
are in the coop you belong to
Legend: 1-Very ashamed; 2-Ashamed; 3-Neutral; 4-Proud; 5-Very proud
Table 11. Poverty perception of respondent
POVERTY PERCEPTION
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
VARIABLES
How do you rate your household
50
3.16 Neutral
Thinking about the future while still a
member of the coop, do you think you
50
3.86 somewhat
and your household will be..
better off
Being a member of a coop, where
50
3.06 Neutral
would you put your self
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
30
Table 11. Continued…
POVERTY PERCEPTION
FREQUENCY MEAN DESCRIPTION
VARIABLES
If there is a crisis, how would rate your
50
3.08 Neutral
household ability to survive such crisis
How confident would you say that you
and your household would cope in a
50
3.32 Neutral
crisis since you became a coop member
Legend: a 1-Very poor; 2-Poor; 3-Neutral; 4-Rich; 5-Very rich
b 1-Much worse off;2-somewhat worse off;3-about the same;4-somewhat better
off;5-much better off
c 1-totally powerless; 2-somewhat powerless; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat powerful; 5
very powerful
d 1-very unsecured; 2-somewhat unsecured; 3-neutral; 4-somewhat secures; 5
very secured
e 1-much less confident; 2-less confident; 3-neutral; 4-more confident; 5-much
more confident
Relationship Between Poverty Perceptions
and Educational attainment
Table 12 shows the respondents mean rating related to poverty perception with respect to
educational attainment. As to household rate, the respondents had a mean rating of 3.16
which is described as neutral and there is no significant difference in their responses. This
means regardless of educational attainment, they are similar in the rating for their
household. As to their perceived rating for the future, it is somewhat better off with a
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
31
mean rating of 3.86 and no significant difference among their perceptions. And for self
evaluation being a member of the coop, they are neutral (WM = 3.08) and there is a very
significant difference in their views as indicated by the significance level of 0.005 which
is lower than the chosen standard significance level 0.05. This means that the level of
education attained is a significant factor in poverty perception. Their ability to survive
crisis is rated as neutral and their confidence in coping crisis in situations is the same as
when they were not yet members of the cooperative. There are no marked differences in
the respondents’ perceptions.
Table 12. Educational attainment and poverty perception
POVERTTY PERCEPTION
ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM
SIG
VARIABLES
1. How do you rate your
3
3.22
3.23
2.87 3.16 0.673
household?
2. Being a member of the
4
3.78
3.77
4.25 3.86 0.483
cooperative, how do you rate your
(and with your household) future?
3. Being a member of the coop,
3
3
2.94
3.63 3.06 0.005**
where would you put yourself?
4. If there was a crisis like poor
crops, loss of job, or illness, how
3.5
3.33
2.87
3.5 3.08
0.25
would you rate your household's
ability to survive the crisis?
5. How confident would you say
that you and your household
3.5
3.33
3.26
3.5 3.32
0.84
would cope in a crisis since you
became a coop member?
Legend: ** highly significant
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
32
Relationship Between Life Satisfactions
And Educational attainment
Table 13 shows the mean ratings on life satisfaction according to educational
attainment. In all the indicators/questions, the perceptions of the respondents are similar
with one another as shown by the significance levels which are higher than 0.05. The
respondents perceive that they are generally happy members of the cooperative (WM =
3.47). They perceive that they have moderate impact in making their cooperative a better
one; neutral in rating togetherness or feeling of belongingness (WM = 3.27); they
perceive that they are somewhat satisfied with their life (WM = 3.60).
Table 13. Life satisfactions and educational attainment
LIFE SATISFACTION VARIABLES ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM SIG
1. Taking all things together, would
4 3.67
3.35 2.87 3.47 0.67
you say you are
2. How much impact do you think
4
4
3.64 3.62 3.82 0.5
members like you, can have in making
your coop a better one
3. How would you rate the
togetherness or feeling of belonging in
3.5 3.33
2.74
3.5 3.27 0.25
your coop?
4. All things considered how satisfied
are you with your life as a whole these
3.5 3.44
3.21 4.25 3.6 0.48
days?
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
33
Relationship Between Sociability of Members
And Educational Attainment
Table 14 presents the sociability of the members within the cooperative,
organization, and within the community as perceived by the members according to
educational background.
Based on the mean ratings from the results, the members never visit their co-
members (WM = 1.37) and there is no significant difference in their perceptions
according to educational attainment (0.14 > 0.05); they seldom get together with their co-
members (WM = 2.16) and there is no significant difference in their perceptions as
shown by a significance level 0.93> 0.05; they sometimes participate in the cooperative’s
decision-making (WM = 2.89) and their perceptions according to educational background
are significantly different from one another since .04 <.05. Furthermore, the members
seldom perform cañao (WM = 2.05) and the respondents are similar in their perceptions
since 0.08 > 0.05; they sometimes join in community activities (WM = 2.97) and their
perceptions are significantly different from one another according to educational
background because the significance level computed is .05. Moreover, the members
seldom have recreational activities (WM = 2.14) and no significant difference in their
perceptions; they sometimes have clan reunions and bayanihan activities and there is a
marked difference in their responses. Based from the findings, the members of BMVMC
seldom have time to socialize with other co-members maybe due to bulk of work and that
they are in their stalls whole day everyday. However, they sometimes join larger groups
of activities like community activities, clan reunion, and Bayanihan.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
34
Table 14. Sociability variables and educational attainment
SOCIABILITY VARIABLES ELEM SEC COLLEGE VOC WM SIG
1. Visit co-members in their
2
1.11
1.39
1
1.37 0.14
homes
2. Get together with co-
members
2.5
2
2.03
2.13 2.16 0.93
3. Participate in coop's
3.5
3
2.19
2.88 2.89 0.04*
decision-making
4. Canao
2.5
2.56
1.52
1.63 2.05 0.08
5. Community activities
3.5
3.22
2.42
2.75 2.97 0.05*
6. Recreations
1
2.89
2.42
2.25 2.14 0.14
7. Clan reunion
4
3.56
2.61
2.88 3.26 0.03*
8. Bayanihan
2
3.33
2.48
3.13 2.73 0.04*
Legend: *significant
Relationship Between Sociability of Members
and Head of Household
Table 15 presents the sociability of the members within the cooperative,
organization, and within the community as perceived by the head of household.
Based on the results, the members never visit their co-members (WM = 1.30) and
there is no significant difference in their perceptions according to educational attainment
(0.93 > 0.05); they seldom get together with their co-members (WM = 2.06) and there is
no significant difference in their perceptions as shown by a significance level 0.34> 0.05;
they seldom participate in the cooperative’s decision-making (WM = 2.49) and their
perceptions are not significantly different from one another since .10 >.05. Furthermore,
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
35
the members never perform cañao (WM = 1.75) and the respondents are similar in their
perceptions since 0.30 > 0.05; they sometimes join in community activities (WM = 2.64)
and their perceptions are not significantly different from one another Moreover, the
members seldom have recreational activities (WM = 2.67) and no significant difference
in their perceptions; they sometimes have clan reunions (WM = 2.86) but they differ very
significantly in their perceptions; they sometimes perform Bayanihan activities and there
is no marked difference in their responses.
Table 15. Sociability of members and head of household
HEAD OF
HOUSEHOLD
SOCIABILITY VARIABLES
YES
NO
WM
SIG.
1. Visit co-members in their homes
1.29
1.31
1.3
0.93
2. Get together with co-members
1.92
2.19
2.06
0.34
3. Participate in coop's decision-making
2.25
2.73
2.49
0.1
4. Canao
1.58
1.92
1.75
0.3
5. Community activities
2.5
2.77
2.64
0.32
6. Recreations
2.17
2.65
2.41
0.11
7. Clan reunion
2.38
3.35
2.86
0**
8. Bayanihan
2.63
2.81
2.72
0.5*
Legend: *significant ** highly significant
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
36
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
This study was conducted mainly to determined the level of social capital among
the members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-purpose Cooperative, the study aimed to
determined the demographic profile of respondents, determined what is the level of social
capital among the members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi-purpose Cooperative,
Informal networks, Trust, Poverty perception, Participation, Life Satisfaction, and to
determine the relationship of the social capital variables.
From the results and analyses, the following were the most salient findings of the
study.
1. Majority of the members are female (78%), are married (78%), are regular
members of the cooperative (96%), had been members of the cooperative for
6-10 yrs (54%), are Ilocanos (40%), are Catholics (60%), finished college
(62%), are household heads (48%), have 6-10 members of the household
(50%), are self-employed (36%) and 30% business owners. The mean age of
the respondents is 44.64 years.
2. Very few of the members participate in religious, cultural/social, and political
activities.
3. Majority of the members of the cooperative participate in the activities of the
cooperative only once a year. The members perceive that the cooperative has
strong leadership, strong sense of cooperativism, and has good governance.
4. Many members perceive that they are somewhat better off in the future as
members of the cooperative, happy and somewhat satisfied in life, moderately
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
37
contributing to the betterment of the cooperative.
5. In terms of educational attainment, they have differing views on self-
evaluation but similar views on life satisfaction.
6. The members grouped according to educational attainment sometimes
participate in community activities, clan reunions, and Bayanihan projects.
Conclusions
Based on the foregoing results and findings, the following conclusions were
derived:
1. Very few males and single are members of the cooperative; it is dominated by
females and married.
2. The members are very much engrossed in their work and almost have no time
for socialization.
Recommendations
The following were recommended by the researcher.
1. Continued intensive information campaign for non-members and continued
trainings and seminars for members.
2. Regularly review the cooperatives goal and objectives and plan strategies to
develop socialization activities that may not interfere with their work hours.
3. Develop more systematic auditing and checks and balances to eliminate
problems on dishonesty and corruption.
4. Elect qualified and trusted men and women as Board of Directors, in
leadership positions and managing director.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
38
5. Further study should be conducted on a wider scope to help the cooperative
diagnose its strengths and weaknesses.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
39
LITERATURE CITED
ALLEN, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000. Social Capital at
http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry retrieved on August 25, 2008.
BOURDIEU, P. 1986. Forms of capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
COLEMAN, J. 1990. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
DEKKER and USLANER, 2001. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social-
capital retrieved on September 19, 2008.
DURLAUF. 2002. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital retrieved
on September 19, 2008.
FLORA, C.1988. Building Social Capital: The Importance of Entrepreneurial Social
Infrastructure at http://www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/newsletter/june97/build-soc-capital.html
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
FOX. 1997. Measuring social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
FUKUYAMA. 1995. Social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital retrieved
on September 19, 2008.
GROOTAERT, C. et al. 2004. Measuring Social Capital, an Integrated Questionnaire.
World Bank Working Paper No. 18. Washington D.C. USA
GULATI.1998. Measuring social capital, an integrated questionnaire. World bank
working paper No. 18. Washington, D.C. USA.
HALPERN, D. 2005, Social Capital, Polity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom at
http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10674/ retrieved on September 29,
2008.
INKELES. 2000. Measuring social capital at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/socialcapital
retrieved on September 19, 2008.
PUTNAM, R. 2000. Social Capital at http://www.infed.org/biblio/social_capital.htm
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
40
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
MILAGROSA, A & L. Slangen 2007. The social capital of indigenous agricultural
communities in Benguet, northern Philippines: socio – cultural implications and
consequences to local vegetable trade.
SOCIAL CAPITAL at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/social_capital retrieved on September
25, 2008.
SOCIAL CAPITALISM at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_capitalism retrieved on
October 1, 2008.
STEWART.1995. Social Capital at http://www.infed.org/biblio/social_capital.htm
retrieved on September 30, 2008.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
41
APPENDIX A
Letter to the Respondents
Republic of the Philippines
Benguet Sate University
La Trinidad, Benguet
Department of Agriculture Economics and Agribusiness Management
Dear Sir/Madam:
I am a fourth year student of Benguet State University, taking up Bachelor of Science in
Agribusiness major in Cooperative Management. Presently, I am conducting my
undergraduate thesis entitled: “Social Capital among Members of BAGUIO MARKET
VENDORS MULTIPURPOSE COOPERATIVE as partial requirement for
graduation.
In this connection, may I request a part of your time to answer the attached questionnaire.
Your kind assistance will enable me to complete all the requirements in due time. Please
give your honest answer for the success of this research. Rest assured that all the
information you provide will be treated with utmost confidentiality.
Aissa A. Nitig
Researcher
Approved By:
Marie Klondy T. Dagupen
Thesis adviser
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
42
APPENDIX B
Survey Questionnaire
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
How
How actively do you
of
much
participate in this group’s
Organi money do
decision-making
zation
you
1 = Leader
or
contribute 2 = Very active
Group
to this
3 = Somewhat active
group in a 4 = Does not participate in
month
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)
Professional association (such as
Rotary, Lion’s , Chamber of
Commerce; specify
Other Cooperatives, specify name
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
43
Sociability
10. Please rate your participation in the following activities?
Never (1) 2
3
4.
5. Always
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 II. INACTIVE ( serves less than 50% of the
of the members)
members)
____ a. Strong leadership
____ a. No strong leadership
____ b. Strong sense of
____ b. no sense f cooperativism
cooperativism
____ c. Politics/politicians
____ c. Mismanagement of coop
____ d. Government support/
____ d. Conflict between groups
management
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
44
____ 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
Little Neutral Much
Very much
trust (1) trust (2)
(3)
(4)
(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
Neutra Confident
Very
confiden confident
l
(4)
confident
t (1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
Family/ relatives, friends,
neighbors,
Moneylender, Informal
credit, groups,
associations
Government, Bank
Cooperatives and co-
members
17. How much do you agree or disagree with each one of the statement.
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
45
Strongl Disagre Neutr Agree Strongl
y
e (2)
al (3)
(4)
y agree
disagre
(5)
e (1)
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)
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
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
46
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)
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
Neutral Just enough Lot of support
(1)
support (2)
(3)
support (4)
(5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
28. How would you rate the support you are getting from parents, children or other
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
47
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 support
(1)
(2)
(3)
support (4)
(5)
Parents
Children
Other
relatives
29. 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
____________________________
30. 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
31. How much formal schooling have you had?
____ None
____ Primary
____ Elementary
____ Secondary
____ University/ College or more
____ Vocational/technical
3. 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?
Social Capital Among Members of Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
48
____ English
____ Tagalog
____ Iloko
____
Ibaloi
____ Kankanaey
____ 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 Baguio Market Vendors Multi – Purpose
Cooperative in Baguio city / Aissa A. Niteg. 2009
Document Outline
- Social Capital Among Members of BaguioMarket Vendors Multi � Purpose Cooperative in Baguio city
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- METHODOLOGY
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDIX