Search

Objectives: To examine the role of socioeconomic, sociodemographic, and social capital factors in buffering or exacerbating the mental health impacts of job loss., Methods: A 2-year longitudinal cohort study of 300 workers experiencing job loss from a motoring manufacturer in Adelaide, South Australia. Data were collected on mental health (12-item version of the General Health Questionnaire) and socioeconomic, sociodemographic, and social capital factors. Analysis used linear mixed-effects regression., Results: Workers had poorer mental health than the general population. Female gender, less years at the plant, and not being partnered were associated with poorer mental health. The effects of financial status depended on current employment and levels of social support. Trust and social contact were associated with better mental health., Conclusion: A number of socioeconomic, sociodemographic, and social capital factors influence mental health in workers experiencing job loss, offering clues on how to support workers.

Objective: We explored Australian workers' experiences of nonstandard employment, how it related to health and well-being, and the role that Bourdieu's forms of capital (cultural, economic, and social resources) played in underpinning workers' agency., Methods: Qualitative data from semistructured interviews with 32 causal workers were analyzed on the basis of framework analysis., Results: Most participants were "deliberate casuals" who had chosen casual over permanent employment, with half of that group naming improved health and well-being as motivation. Those with greater access to capital felt more able to exercise choice, whereas those with fewer capital resources felt constrained to be casual. Gendered structures and labor market dynamics were also significant in shaping agency., Conclusions: Access to capital and a buoyant labor market underpinned workers' agency in Australia, enabling some to gain health and well-being benefits from nonstandard employment.

This paper reports on a survey (N=3344) and in-depth interviews (N=80) from four socio-economically contrasting postcode areas in Adelaide. Logistic regression was used to examine locational differences in self-rated health, controlling for demographic, socio-economic factors, health behaviours, individual social capital (social networks, support, reciprocity, trust) and perceived neighbourhood cohesion and safety. Statistically significant locational differences in health emerged. Perceived neighbourhood cohesion and safety accounted for this difference. Interviews explored perceptions of cohesion and safety and found that they were intricately related and varied between the areas. The implications of the findings for understanding locational differences in health are discussed.

Objective: This paper seeks to compare the relationships between social capital and health for rural and urban residents of South Australia., Methods: Using data from a South Australian telephone survey of 2,013 respondents (1,402 urban and 611 rural), separate path analyses for the rural and urban samples were used to compare the relationships between six social capital measures, six demographic variables, and mental and physical health (measured by the SF-12)., Results: Higher levels of networks, civic participation and cohesion were reported in rural areas. Education and income were consistently linked with social capital variables for both rural and urban participants, with those on higher incomes and with higher educational achievement having higher levels of social capital. However, there were also differences between the rural and urban groups in some of the other predictors of social capital variables. Mental health was better among rural participants, but there was no significant difference for physical health. Social capital was associated with good mental health for both urban and rural participants, but with physical health only for urban participants. Higher levels of social capital were significantly associated with better mental health for both urban and rural participants, but with better physical health only for urban participants., Conclusions and Implications: The study found that social capital and its relationship to health differed for participants in rural and urban areas, and that there were also differences between the areas in associations with socioeconomic variables. Policies aiming to strengthen social capital in order to promote health need to be designed for specific settings and particular communities within these.

This paper considers the health implications of access to social capital (SC) using data from a survey of households in two suburbs in Adelaide, Australia. SC was conceptualised as comprising 'infrastructure'--the networks and values that facilitate access to resources; and 'resources'--the resources available through this infrastructure. Questionnaires were delivered to all households in the area, asking the adult with the next birthday to complete it. In all, 530 (50%) were returned. A partial least-squares path analysis was undertaken using demographic, SC and health latent variables, and a measure of perceived relative advantage. Three infrastructure (values, formal networks and informal networks) and four resource (help, acceptance by neighbours, civic activities and feelings of control) variables were considered. Mental and physical health were measured using the SF-12. The values variable was associated with all the resource variables, the informal networks variable was related to help, and the formal networks variable was associated with civic actions. There were significant sociodemographic differences in a number of the infrastructure and resource variables, as well as mental and physical health. Those who were better off materially also had greater access to elements of SC, and reported better health. Values, informal networks, help, and control were all directly or indirectly positively associated with better mental health. No SC variables were associated with physical health. Perceived relative advantage was positively associated with a number of SC variables and also mental and physical health. The implications for health promotion are discussed.

Social capital has been linked to health outcomes, though there are some inconsistencies in the research and the link is dependent on the measures of social capital and health used. In this paper, we argue that social capital is multifaceted and its relationship with health is complex. We explore the relationship between a number of elements of neighbourhood life and neighbourhood-based social capital, and health, using both qualitative and quantitative methods. The paper reports on a study of the Western suburbs of Adelaide and the analysis of 2400 questionnaires and 40 in-depth interviews. A partial least-square path analysis was undertaken with the questionnaire data. It considered the impact of perceptions of the physical environment, neighbourhood connections, neighbourhood trust, reciprocity, perceived safety and local civic action, and a number of demographic variables, on physical and mental health as measured by the SF-12. Of the neighbourhood-related variables, only perceived neighbourhood safety was related to physical health, with neighbourhood safety and neighbourhood connections related to mental health. Of the demographic variables, higher-income level and educational achievement were related to better physical and mental health. In addition, physical health was lower and mental health higher within older age groups. The inter-relationships between the neighbourhood variables and demographic differences in experience of neighbourhood were also examined. The thematic analysis of the interviews linked a number of social aspects of neighbourhood, the physical neighbourhood environment, perceptions of safety, civic activities and availability of local services, to health outcomes. The paper concludes that there is a need for more complex measures of social capital and that socio-economic factors are of relatively greater importance in determining health.