Neighbourhood Collective Efficacy: A Scoping Review of Existing Research Jessica Carrière Research Paper 239 Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership July 2016 Funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada through the Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership www.neighbourhoodchange.ca ISSN 0316-0068; ISBN 978-0-7727-9125-2 Neighbourhood Collective Efficacy ii Neighbourhood Collective Efficacy: A Scoping Review of Existing Research by Jessica Carriere July 2016, iv, 40 pp. ISSN 0316-0068 ISBN 978-0-7727-9125-2 Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work University of Toronto 248 Bloor Street West Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1V4 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http: //neighbourhoodchange.ca This study and its dissemination are supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Hu- manities Research Council of Canada which has funded the Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership based at the University of Toronto (J. David Hulchanski, Principal Investigator). The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the research team, the advisory board members, the university, or the funder. Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership iii Neighbourhood Collective Efficacy Executive Summary This review of collective efficacy literature was part of the initial stage of the Collective Efficacy Working Group’s (CEWG) three-phase research process. The group was established in 2012 as part of the larger Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership (NCRP). The review is intended to explore and build upon traditional conceptions of “collective efficacy” in order to establish a research framework through which we may begin to understand how residents and organizations work together in neighbourhoods to achieve important local improvements, and draw upon these collective achievements to effect system-wide change. The collective efficacy research frame is extended here to include community-based organizations and their impacts on neighbourhood collective efficacy, beyond those at the individual and household levels. Findings underscore a lack of scholarship on the role of collective efficacy in neighbourhoods, as well as a lack of comparative research on the disparate effects of local state regimes and histories of immigration on neighbourhood collective efficacy. Moreover, while recent literature has examined the influence of local factors (such as laws and tax rates) and interpersonal networks on organizations, there is a gap in academic scholarship and literature about the role of organizations in shaping community outcomes. This report will address this disparity, recommending new research to explore the activities, practices, service delivery, and advocacy efforts of organizations in fostering and sustaining neighbourhood collective efficacy, and leveraging that capacity to bring about larger-scale system changes. One of the key goals of the NCRP is to examine place-specific effects in mitigating or exacerbating processes of socio-spatial inequality. This research fits within this broad objective, exploring the role that neighbourhood-level policy and program interventions can play in reducing inequality. Community-based organizations, funders, and policy makers require a better understanding of the role of collective efficacy in neighbourhood outcomes. Author Jessica Carrière is a PhD Candidate in the Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work at the University of Toronto. Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership Neighbourhood Collective Efficacy iv Table of Contents 1. Rationale and Potential Policy Relevance ......................................................................... 5 2. Collective Efficacy and Neighbourhood: An Overview of Definitions and Concepts ........ 7 2.1 Collective efficacy and neighbourhood crime ................................................................... 8 2.2 Cultural collective efficacy ................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Collective efficacy and local organizational behaviour ..................................................... 9 3. Socio-Spatial Inequality and Collective Efficacy: Theoretical and Empirical Debates ..... 10 3.1 Traditional approaches to the framing of collective efficacy .......................................... 10 3.2 Challenging popular collective efficacy frameworks ....................................................... 11 4. Factors Contributing to Neighbourhood Capacity for Collective Efficacy ........................ 13 4.1 Collective efficacy and place attachment ........................................................................ 13 4.2 Perceived social efficacy .................................................................................................. 13 4.3 Political factors ................................................................................................................. 14 5. Empirical Indicators of Collective Efficacy and their Measurement ................................. 15 5.1 Individual and group perceptions of efficacy ................................................................... 15 5.2 Social organization measures ......................................................................................... 17 6. Collective Efficacy and Neighbourhood Socio-Economic Status .................................... 19 6.1 Collective efficacy and neighbourhood SES ................................................................... 19 6.2 Mixed-income neighbourhoods and collective efficacy .................................................. 20 6.3 Collective efficacy and the “rooted middle class” ........................................................... 20 6.4 Concentrated disadvantage and collective efficacy ....................................................... 20 7. The Role of Local Organizations ..................................................................................... 22 7.1 Examining organizational capacity “in place” .................................................................. 22 7.2 Social movements-in-organizations ................................................................................ 23 8. Linking Collective Efficacy, Neighbourhood Cohesion, and Collective Action ................ 24 8.1 Neighbourhood cohesion and collective efficacy ........................................................... 24 8.2 Collective efficacy and action .......................................................................................... 24 8.3 Containing collective action: Cities and social movements ........................................... 25 9. Limitations of the Neighbourhood Scale of Analysis ....................................................... 26 9.1 Rethinking “problem” neighbourhoods ............................................................................ 27 9.2 Neighbouring in Toronto’s inner suburbs ........................................................................ 27 10. Conclusions and a Direction for Future Research ........................................................... 29 11. References ...................................................................................................................... 31 12. Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 37 Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership 1. Rationale and Potential Policy Relevance Why do some neighbourhoods have more success than others in addressing the effects of so- cial-spatial inequality and socio-economic segregation? In an attempt to answer this very large question, researchers have pointed to the role of neigh- bourhood processes in shaping social, educational, health, safety, crime, and economic out- comes (Edin and Lein, 1997; Gans, 1969; Mascovsky, 1999; Patterson, 2001). Evidence sug- gests that one such process, “collective efficacy” (Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls, 1997) – that is, the ability of neighbours to cultivate trust amongst each other, to generate shared ex- pectations, to draw productively from social networks, and to collectively mobilize for action. The literature offers certain plausible explanations to account for the presence or lack of collec- tive efficacy: • systemic barriers (e.g., concentrations of poverty and disadvantaged ethno-cultural groups); • behavioural and attitudinal factors; • the role of existing social networks and other forms of pre-existing social capital. Apart from a few education-based studies (Demir, 2008; Dimopoulou, 2012; Goddard, 2001; Lin and Peng, 2010; Mawhinney, Haas, and Wood, 2005), and work on social movements by sociologists like Davis et al. (2008), Gould (2003) and McAdam and Snow (2010), there is still insufficient literature on the place of community-based organizations in fostering and sustaining neighbourhood collective efficacy. The aim of a scoping review of the literature is to identify the key concepts underpinning a re- search area and the main sources and types of evidence available. Scoping reviews are often the first stage of a research project, informing the subsequent stages. Defining the research questions is important, influencing the nature of the literature search. This review is animated by two key questions: 1. What are the impacts of community-based organizations (particularly those in low-income and disadvantaged neighbourhoods) on neighbourhood collective efficacy, beyond