Why Some Neighborhoods Help People Escape Poverty

Amanda Fisher
Community Engagement Director
Read more from Amanda

Scientific research is a valuable resource for learning about charitable programs’ best practices. Often, a well-designed study does a better job of confirming or disproving assumptions than anecdotal observations or deliberate outcomes measurement. This synopsis addresses the findings of a 2022 study entitled Social Capital I: Measurement and Associations with Economic Mobility.

What Question Does This Research Answer?

What impact does social capital have on upward economic mobility?

The study surveyed data across 21 billion friendships on Facebook to examine the effects of three kinds of social capital (or social connectedness) on upward economic mobility: cross-type economic connectedness (relationships between those with low vs high socioeconomic status); social cohesion (i.e., cliques in friendship networks and how many friends are friends with each other); and civic engagement (i.e., volunteering).

Study Design

Data Source: Facebook

Sample Size: The data is based on 72.2 million Facebook users ages 25-44 in the United States across 21 billion “friendships.”

Type of Study: This is an observational study, which means researchers observed the apparent effect of an intervention without determining who does and does not receive the intervention.

Limitations: Because this is a natural experiment rather than a randomized control trial, the results can only suggest correlation rather than causation. Additionally, as correlations are made, one must be cautious of using Facebook to provide a comprehensive picture of one’s social network’s breadth and depth.

Key Findings

Of the three types of social capital examined, cross-type economic connectedness is the most important in predicting upward economic mobility. “If children with low socioeconomic status parents were to grow up in counties with economic connectedness comparable to that of the [typical] child with high socioeconomic status parents, their income in adulthood increases by 20% on average.”
Economic connectedness in a community is the single best population-level predictor of whether children who grow up there will be upwardly mobile. It is more significant than neighborhood median income, degree of racial segregation, income inequality, math test scores, and the ratio of single-parent households (which still matter, just to a lesser degree). In fact, the study suggests economic connectedness is such a significant factor that, regardless of ZIP code, nearly all variations in income mobility outcomes for children can be explained by economic connectedness.
In-group cohesion may have other benefits not evaluated by this study, but it’s not a significant driver of economic mobility.
Almost none of the lowest-income ZIP codes in the US exhibited high levels of economic connectedness. If there were a few higher socioeconomic status individuals in the vicinity, there appeared to be very little opportunity for people with low socioeconomic status to connect with them. This echoes the observation of sociologist Peter M. Blau that “persons cannot associate without having opportunities for contact.”

Practical Application

Poverty is complex, so it’s refreshing to find a study that demonstrates factors other than one’s ZIP code that affect upward economic mobility. All else being equal, it’s common knowledge kids in poor neighborhoods have worse life outcomes than kids growing up in better ones. Therefore, it’s significant this study strongly suggests neighborhood effects can be entirely offset by increasing economic connectedness. Of equal importance, it provides a very tangible focus point to help neighborhood development organizations prioritize an overwhelming list of things they could help improve.

As well, the study supports a True Charity basic belief that relationships are a key antidote to poverty and are vital in breaking generational cycles of poverty. These findings should persuade those of higher socioeconomic status–especially within the church–to open themselves to bonding with those of lower socioeconomic status. Doing so will create an environment that fosters sincere, caring relationships.

Because these connections are essential for upward mobility, we must continue to emphasize bridging social capital through mentoring and other relationships. This study clearly shows the importance of implementing programs that promote economic connectedness, such as Circles USA or Faith and Finances.

The research also supports the need for training volunteers to build relationships with people in need (as opposed to simply completing tasks on their behalf).

Finally, one must be careful about insinuating higher socioeconomic status or upward economic mobility equals flourishing. Benefits to engaged, clustered societies beyond income mobility should be considered.

Conclusion

Churches and nonprofits must focus energy on building relationships with individuals struggling in poverty–specifically, bonding with those of a different socioeconomic status. Join the True Charity movement for practical tools and tips on how to get started or improve your current charitable efforts.

Read the Study

You can access it here: Social Capital I: Measurement and Associations with Economic Mobility.

Also, explore the data for your specific area through this helpful tool.