The Impact of the Internet on Relational Goods: Empirical Evidence from European Countries

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 1587 - 1611, 31.12.2024

Keziban Altun Erdoğdu

https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1513530

Abstract

Along with behavioral approaches in economics, a new social concept has emerged which is built on human relationships. Being called relational goods, this concept represents the advantages that people derive from their relationships with each other, such as social approval, friendship, companionship, etc. Relational goods that make people feel satisfied and content are generally produced/consumed in positive family and friendship connections. Nowadays it might be expensive to maintain this kind of relations. Spending time on the internet or social media has become more and more appealing for many people. Especially in European countries, where the percentage of people who prefer to be isolated is rising rapidly day by day, the rate of internet use is quite high. This study aims to investigate the impact of the internet on relational goods in Europe based on the data from the 10th Round of the European Social Survey. In this direction, firstly, categorical principal component analysis was employed in order to construct proxy indicators coded as “social relations” and “family relations” instead of relational goods. Afterwards, the relationship between these indicators and internet use was analyzed with the help of figures. The figures suggest that as average daily internet use increases, both social and family relationships weaken. The findings reveal that in countries where people spend less time online, social ties with family, friends, neighbors or close friends are relatively robust; on the contrary, in countries where people use the internet intensively, communication within the family and in social life is generally poor. The results of the regression indicate that in addition to the internet, socio-economic and socio-demographic factors are also determinants of interpersonal relationships. This study, contrary to the literature, finds that in European countries, the use of the internet weakens the ties between people and reduces the production/consumption of relational goods.

Keywords

Relational Goods, Internet, European Countries

Ethical Statement

This research does not need the approval of Ethics Committee. The study has been crafted in adherence to the principles of research and publication ethics. The author declares that there exists no financial conflict of interest involving any institution, organization, or individual(s) associated with the article. The entire work was carried out by its only, stated author.

References

• Albuquerque, P. C., & Fontainha, E. (2023). Social exclusion in later life, evidence from the european social survey. In N. Burnay, J. Ogg, C. Krekula, & P. Vendramin (Eds.), Older workers and labour market exclusion processes (pp. 191- 209). Springer International Publishing.
• Antoci, A., Sacco, P. L., & Vanin, P. (2007). Social capital accumulation and the evolution of social participation. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36(1), 128-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2005.11.011
• Barbosa Neves, B., Fonseca, J. R., Amaro, F., & Pasqualotti, A. (2018). Social capital and Internet use in an age- comparative perspective with a focus on later life. PloS One, 13(2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192119
• Bartolini, S. (2019). Unhappiness as an engine of economic growth. In M. Rojas (Ed.), The economics of happiness how the easterlin paradox transformed our understanding of well-being and progress (pp. 271- 301). Springer International Publishing.
• Bauernschuster, S., Falck, O., & Woessmann, L. (2014). Surfing alone? The internet and social capital: Evidence from an unforeseeable technological mistake. Journal of Public Economics, 117, 73-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.05.007
• Becchetti, L, & Santoro, M. (2007). The income–unhappiness paradox: a relational goods/baumol disease explanation. In L. Bruni, & P. L. Porta (Eds.), Handbook on the economics of happiness (pp. 239-262). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Becchetti, L., & Pelloni, A. (2013). What are we learning from the life satisfaction literature?. International Review of Economics, 60, 113-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-013-0177-1
• Becchetti, L., Bobbio, E., Prizia, F., & Semplici, L. (2022). Going deeper into the S of ESG: a relational approach to the definition of social responsibility. Sustainability, 14(15), 9668. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159668
• Becchetti, L., Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (2019). The microeconomics of wellbeing and sustainability: recasting the economic process. Academic Press.
• Becchetti, L., Cermelli, M., & De Rosa, D. (2024). Three times more than money: generativity, relational goods and life satisfaction. International Review of Economics, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-024-00472-9
• Becchetti, L., Trovato, G., & Londono Bedoya, D. A. (2011). Income, relational goods and happiness. Applied Economics, 43(3), 273-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840802570439
• Bruni, L. (2012). The ambivalence of the good life: happiness, economics, technology, and relational goods. In: P. Brey, A. Briggle, & E. Spence (Eds.), The good life in a technological age (pp. 109-130). Routledge.
• Bruni, L. (2016). Public happiness and relational goods: that crucial link that economics and policy often forget. In S. Bartolini, E. Bilancini, L. Bruni, & P.L. Porta (Eds.), Policies for happiness (pp. 263-282). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198758730.003.00
• Bruni, L., & Stanca, L. (2008). Watching alone: Relational goods, television and happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65(3-4), 506-528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2005.12.005
• Bruni, L., Rosa, D. D., & Ferri, G. (2019). Cooperatives and happiness. cross-country evidence on the role of relational capital. Applied Economics, 51(30), 3325-3343.
• Bünger, B. (2010). The demand for relational goods: Empirical evidence from the European Social Survey. International Review of Economics, 57, 177-198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-010-0094-5
• Carlsen, H. B., Toubøl, J., & Brincker, B. (2021). On solidarity and volunteering during the COVID-19 crisis in Denmark: The impact of social networks and social media groups on the distribution of support. European Societies, 23(1), 122-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1818270
• Chung, K. H., Shim, D. C., & Park, H. H. (2024). Revisiting theory of social capital: Can the internet make a difference?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 202, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123282
• Colombo, E., & Stanca, L. (2014). Measuring the monetary value of social relations: A hedonic approach. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 50, 77-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2014.03.001
• Colombo, E., Rotondi, V., & Stanca, L. (2018). Macroeconomic conditions and well-being: Do social interactions matter?. Applied Economics, 50(28), 3029-3038. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2017.1414935
• Demir, Y., Keskin, S., & Çavuşoğlu, Ş. (2021). Doğrusal olmayan temel bileşenler analizinin tanıtımı ve uygulanabilirliği. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi, 24(2), 442-450. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.770817
• Donati, P. (2014). Relational goods and their subjects: The ferment of a new civil society and civil democracy. Recerca. Revista de Pensament i Anàlisi, (14), 19-46.
• Gui, B. (1987). Eléments pour une définition d’économie communautaire. Notes et Documents, 19(20), 32-42.
• Gui, B. (2005). From transactions to encounters: The joint generation of relational goods and conventional values. In B. Gui, & R. Sugden (Eds.), Economics and social interaction: accounting for interpersonal relations (pp. 23-51). Cambridge University Press.
• Gui, B. (2013). Relational goods. In L. Bruni, & S. Zamagni (Eds.), Handbook on the economics of reciprocity and social enterprise (pp. 295-305). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Kharisma, B. (2022). Surfing alone? The Internet and social capital: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Economic Structures, 11(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-022-00267-7
• Kwilinski, A., Vyshnevskyi, O., & Dzwigol, H. (2020). Digitalization of the EU economies and people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(7), 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13070142
• Linting, M., Meulman, J. J., Groenen, P. J., & van der Koojj, A. J. (2007). Nonlinear principal components analysis: Introduction and application. Psychological Methods, 12(3), 336. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.3.336
• Lopes, H., & Calapez, T. (2011). Exploring the sources and benefits of cooperation: The role and challenges of relational and moral goods. International Journal of Social Economics, 38(7), 607-627. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068291111139249
• Lopes, H., & Calapez, T. (2012). The relational dimension of identity—Theoretical and empirical exploration. Review of Social Economy, 70(1), 81-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2011.592279
• Mesch, G. S. (2006). Family relations and the Internet: Exploring a family boundaries approach. The Journal of Family Communication, 6(2), 119-138. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327698jfc0602_2
• Meulman, J. J., Van der Kooij, A. J., & Heiser, W. J. (2004). Principal components analysis with nonlinear optimal scaling transformations for ordinal and nominal data. In D. Kaplan (Eds.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 49-70). Sage Publications.
• Pugno, M. (2009). The Easterlin paradox and the decline of social capital: An integrated explanation. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(4), 590-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2009.03.012
• Pugno, M. (2013). Scitovsky and the income-happiness paradox. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 43, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.11.016
• Pugno, M. (2022). Well-being and growth in advanced economies: the need to prioritise human development. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003241676
• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster.
• Rasciute, S., Downward, P., & Greene, W. H. (2017). Do relational goods raise well-being? An econometric analysis. Eastern Economic Journal, 43, 563-579. https://doi.org/10.1057/eej.2015.46
• Robison, L. J., Malone, T., Oliver, J. O., Bali, V., & Winder, R. E. (2020). Social capital, relational goods, and terms and level of exchange. Modern Economy, 11(07), 1288-1306. https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2020.117092
• Sabatini, F. (2009). Social capital as social networks: A new framework for measurement and an empirical analysis of its determinants and consequences. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(3), 429-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2008.06.001
• Sabatini, F., & Sarracino, F. (2019). Online social networks and trust. Social Indicators Research, 142, 229-260.
• https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1887-2
• Sarracino, F. (2012). Money, sociability and happiness: Are developed countries doomed to social erosion and unhappiness? Time-series analysis of social capital and subjective well-being in Western Europe, Australia, Canada and Japan. Social Indicators Research, 109(2), https://doi.org/135-188. 10.1007/s11205-011-9898-2
• Sarracino, F., & Piekałkiewicz, M. (2021). The role of income and social capital for Europeans’ well-being during the 2008 economic crisis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(4), 1583-1610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020- 00285-x
• Saukani, N., & Ismail, N. A. (2019). Identifying the components of social capital by categorical principal component analysis (CATPCA). Social Indicators Research, 141, 631-655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018- 1842-2
• Schmiedeberg, C., & Schröder, J. (2017). Leisure activities and life satisfaction: An analysis with German panel data. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 12, 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9458-7
• Scitovsky, T. (1976). The joyless economy: An inquiry into human satisfaction and consumer dissatisfaction. Oxford University Press.
• Stanca, L. (2009). With or without you? Measuring the quality of relational life throughout the world. The Journal of Socio-economics, 38(5), 834-842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2009.03.004
• Stanca, L. (2016). Happiness, relational goods and hedonic methodology. In L. Bruni, & P. L. Porta (Eds.), Handbook of research methods and applications in happiness and quality of life (pp. 483-498). Edward Elgar.
• Sugden, R. (2005). Fellow-Feeling. In B. Gui, & R. Sugden (Eds.), Economics and social interaction: accounting for interpersonal relations (pp. 23-51). Cambridge University Press.
• Uhlaner, C. J. (1989). “Relational goods” and participation: Incorporating sociability into a theory of rational action. Public Choice, 62(3), 253-285.