Composite Indicators for the Family Change: ‘Familism' vs ‘Individualism' in the International Context

The aim of this paper is to propose a composite indicator to measure ‘familism’, conformed by two main dimensions: values on one hand (duty to take care of the family, importance of the family, sacrifices for the family...) and behaviours, on the other (predominance of married couples instead of cohabitant couples, high frequency of contact among members, family support…). In contrast to this idea of ‘familism’ we find that of individualism, that defends the independence of family members, tolerance to new family models, cohabitation instead of marriage,… , that implies less frequency of interaction among relatives and more governmental intervention towards children and elderly care. We observe that a higher degree of ‘familism’ does not always match with a lower degree of individualism when both dimensions, attitudes and behaviours, are considered. For instance, we find countries which are individualist in values but not in behaviours (such as Spain), whilst others, such as Japan, are ‘familist’ both in values and behaviours and finally, others, such as Sweden, are individualist with regards to both perspectives. We propose two different methodological approaches to the question. First, we use microdata from the Family, Work and Gender Roles module of the International Social Survey Programme-ISSP (years 1994, 2002 and 2012), in which 45 countries have participated. Information for the three rounds is collected for 17 countries with very different family values and welfare systems (for instance, Sweden, Japan, Russia, Spain, United Kingdom or the United States). From this data source, we create a first index on familism that can be related to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Second, we complete it through the inclusion of macro data (such as the divorce rate per country), in order to refine comparison at a country level by adding new variables to the previous index.

Composite Indicators for the Family Change: ‘Familism' vs ‘Individualism' in the International Context

The aim of this paper is to propose a composite indicator to measure ‘familism’, conformed by two main dimensions: values on one hand (duty to take care of the family, importance of the family, sacrifices for the family...) and behaviours, on the other (predominance of married couples instead of cohabitant couples, high frequency of contact among members, family support…). In contrast to this idea of ‘familism’ we find that of individualism, that defends the independence of family members, tolerance to new family models, cohabitation instead of marriage,… , that implies less frequency of interaction among relatives and more governmental intervention towards children and elderly care. We observe that a higher degree of ‘familism’ does not always match with a lower degree of individualism when both dimensions, attitudes and behaviours, are considered. For instance, we find countries which are individualist in values but not in behaviours (such as Spain), whilst others, such as Japan, are ‘familist’ both in values and behaviours and finally, others, such as Sweden, are individualist with regards to both perspectives. We propose two different methodological approaches to the question. First, we use microdata from the Family, Work and Gender Roles module of the International Social Survey Programme-ISSP (years 1994, 2002 and 2012), in which 45 countries have participated. Information for the three rounds is collected for 17 countries with very different family values and welfare systems (for instance, Sweden, Japan, Russia, Spain, United Kingdom or the United States). From this data source, we create a first index on familism that can be related to individual sociodemographic characteristics. Second, we complete it through the inclusion of macro data (such as the divorce rate per country), in order to refine comparison at a country level by adding new variables to the previous index.

Estimating social carrying capacity in protected Mediterranean mountain areas. Methodological orientation

The concept of social carrying capacity, though opens to debate and critique, is a valuable tool that enhances the management of recreational use in protected natural areas. In this study, conducted in Sierra de las Nieves natural park (Spain), we first categorised the hikers making use of the park and then, from the profiles obtained, analysed their perception of crowding on the trails. This assessment was subsequently used to assess levels of user satisfaction and thus to determine the psychosocial carrying capacity of the park. The results obtained can be extrapolated to most of the Spanish natural parks in Mediterranean mountain areas, due to their comparable levels of visitor numbers and to the prevalence of recreational hiking use. The results suggest that management efforts should be directed toward relocating trails outside the core areas, such that user preferences may be satisfied while less impact is made on the areas of highest environmental value.