ABSTRACT This article studies the impact of a range of state institutions on citizens’ contacts with family and close friends in 20 countries. Recent studies have shown large country level differences in social participation. We aim to explain these differences from an actor centered institutionalist perspective. We present two lines of reasoning. According to the first, a high level of social security crowds out social participation, as intimate networks are no longer needed as an economic safety net. The second line of reasoning proposes that corruption or a lack of civil rights drive citizens to seek refuge in their secure intimate contacts. In a comparative, multi-level design we focus on participation in the nuclear family, in the extended family, and with the best friend. We test the two lines of reasoning simultaneously on ISSP 2001 data. We find that states matter. State institutions are an important determinant of social participation. Our findings mainly confirm the second line of reasoning, whereas the crowding out thesis is only supported for contact with the extended family. Moreover, we find that the contextual effects are not similar across social groups: the poor are more strongly affected by the institutional design than the rich.

We set out to describe and explain differences in the amount of some dimensions of social capital within and between European societies. Social capital refers to a wide range of social phenomena; however, we focus on social contacts with family and friends. We derive hypotheses about cross-national differences in social capital from theories on the nature of welfare state regimes. We test these hypotheses with multi-level analyses on Eurobarometer data, collected in thirteen countries. We find significant variance across different countries. This variance is partly explained by individual characteristics: religious people and people living in medium-sized or rural towns have more social contacts. Moreover, we find quite differential effects of other individual characteristics on social contacts and no effects of political stances. Differences in the cross-national compositions in educational attainment and household size also account for the variance in social contacts. Finally, people living in social-democratic regimes turn out to have the smallest amount of social contacts, whereas people living in the Latin Rim have the largest amount. In between, we find people living in liberal, respectively, conservative-corporatist regimes. This explanation is opposed to the hypothesis that it is the difference in social security rates that causes differences in social capital.